National Dairy Products Corp.

5 Cited authorities

Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills
353 U.S. 448 (1957) Cited 2,323 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that § 301 expresses a federal policy in favor of the enforceability of labor contracts
Employees v. Westinghouse Corp.
348 U.S. 437 (1955) Cited 245 times
Noting that the "litigation provoking problem" in deciding whether federal jurisdiction exists in such cases is determining "the degree to which federal law must be in the forefront of the case and not be remote, collateral or peripheral"
Teamsters Union v. Oliver
358 U.S. 283 (1959) Cited 166 times 1 Legal Analyses
In Teamsters v. Oliver, 358 U.S. 283 (1959), we held that a state antitrust law could not be used to challenge an employer-union agreement. Justice White's opinion in Jewel Tea explains, however, that Oliver held only that "[a]s the agreement did not embody a `"remote and indirect approach to the subject of wages'... but a direct frontal attack upon a problem thought to threaten the maintenance of the basic wage structure established by the collective bargaining contract,' [358 U.S.], at 294, the paramount federal policy of encouraging collective bargaining proscribed application of the state law.
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Knight Morley Corp.
251 F.2d 753 (6th Cir. 1958) Cited 20 times
Holding that § 502's purpose was to give employees a right to walk off the job because of abnormally dangerous conditions "even in the face of a no-strike clause in their contract with an employer"
Timken Roller Bearing v. Natl. Labor Rel. Bd.
161 F.2d 949 (6th Cir. 1947) Cited 31 times
In Timken Roller Bearing Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 6 Cir., 161 F.2d 949, relied upon by plaintiff, arbitrability of the question of contracting out work was recognized as an interpretation of a management function clause of the agreement there involved.

National Dairy Products Corp.

5 Cited authorities

Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills

Holding that § 301 expresses a federal policy in favor of the enforceability of labor contracts

Employees v. Westinghouse Corp.

Noting that the "litigation provoking problem" in deciding whether federal jurisdiction exists in such cases is determining "the degree to which federal law must be in the forefront of the case and not be remote, collateral or peripheral"

Teamsters Union v. Oliver

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Knight Morley Corp.

Holding that § 502's purpose was to give employees a right to walk off the job because of abnormally dangerous conditions "even in the face of a no-strike clause in their contract with an employer"

Timken Roller Bearing v. Natl. Labor Rel. Bd.

In Timken Roller Bearing Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 6 Cir., 161 F.2d 949, relied upon by plaintiff, arbitrability of the question of contracting out work was recognized as an interpretation of a management function clause of the agreement there involved.