Weber et al. v. Anheuser-busch, Inc. (348 U.S. 468)

U.S. Supreme Court · decided March 28, 1955 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)

Citation
348 U.S. 468 · 75 S. Ct. 480
Docket
No. 97
Argued
February 2, 1955
Decided
March 28, 1955
Term
October Term 1954
Vote
8–0
Majority author
Justice Frankfurter
Issue area
Federalism
Disposition
Reversed and remanded
Outcome
Petitioning party won
Ideological direction
Liberal

How the Justices voted

Majority
Chief Justice Warren, Justice Douglas, Justice Clark, Justice Frankfurter (wrote), Justice Burton, Justice Reed, Justice Minton
Concurring in the judgment
Justice Black

Opinion on Justia

Opinion excerpt

Me. Justice Frankfurter delivered the opinion of the Court. This case grew out of a dispute between petitioner, the International Association of Machinists (IAM), affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, and the Millwrights, affiliated with the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners (Carpenters), which in turn was affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, over millwright work being performed for respondent, each union claiming the work for its own members. Respondent is engaged in the interstate manufacture and sale of beer and other commodities, with its principal place of business in St. Louis, Missouri. Its employees include members of both the IAM and the Carpenters. Respondent has always required a large amount of millwright work to be performed by outside contractors in the expansion of its facilities. After the IAM was certified in 1948 by the National Labor Relations Board as the exclusive bargaining representative of respondent’s machinists, respondent executed a collective bargaining contract with the IAM for 1949 which provided in part that when the repair or replacement of machinery was necessary, this work would be given only to those contractors who had collective agreements with the IAM. As a result of protests from the Carpenters, who claimed the same type of work for their own members, the clause was deleted from the 1950 contract…

Excerpt of a 26,059-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.

← Back to the decisions database