United States Steel Corp. v. Curry

Alabama Court of Appeals

United States Steel Corp. v. Curry

114 So. 2d 532, 40 Ala. App. 430, 1958 Ala. App. LEXIS 145

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 25, 1958

Docket6 Div. 576

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 114 So. 2d 532 (United States Steel Corp. v. Curry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Alabama Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States Steel Corp. v. Curry, 114 So. 2d 532, 40 Ala. App. 430, 1958 Ala. App. LEXIS 145 (Ala. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinions

CATES, Judge.

The appellee filed a claim for unemployment benefits; the appellant contested, asserting he was disqualified under the labor dispute provision, Code 1940, T. 26, § 214 (A), as amended.

Curry worked at the Bessemer Rolling Mill, a part of the appellant’s steel making complex. He- was unemployed July 29-August 12, 1955. Appellant’s railroad conductors were on strike at this time.

-We refer to the other cases involving [431]*431similar claims this day decided. 114 So.2d 553 to 565.

On authority of Usher v. Department of Industrial Relations, 261 Ala. 509, 75 So.2d 165, the judgment of the circuit court is

Affirmed.

After Remandment

We find Curry’s record fails to show him a union member. See also United States Steel Corporation v. Baxley, Ala.App., 114 So.2d 553.¹ Hence, under the Usher rule as applied in United States Steel Corporation v. Garris, 39 Ala.App. 428, 104 So.2d 327, he was an innocent bystander.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI