Madden v. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION, ETC., 12428.

• Decision Date: 02 October 1958
• Docket Number: No. 12428.,12428.
• Citation: 259 F.2d 297
• Parties: Ross M. MADDEN, Regional Director of the Thirteenth Region of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on behalf of the National Labor Relations Board, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS AND PILOTS, INC., AFL-CIO, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit

259 F.2d 297 (1958)

Ross M. MADDEN, Regional Director of the Thirteenth Region of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on behalf of the National Labor Relations Board, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS AND PILOTS, INC., AFL-CIO, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 12428.

United States Court of Appeals Seventh Circuit.

October 2, 1958.

Winthrop A. Johns, Asst. General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D. C., for appellant.

Mozart G. Ratner, Chicago, Ill., for appellee.

Before FINNEGAN, HASTINGS and PARKINSON, Circuit Judges.

FINNEGAN, Circuit Judge.

On August 28, 1958 Ross M. Madden, Regional Director of the Thirteenth Region of the National Labor Relations Board, pressed an "emergency" motion in our court, asking in substance, for a temporary order restraining Local 28, International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots, Inc., AFL-CIO; Associated Maritime Workers Local 3, International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots, Inc., AFL-CIO; their officers, representatives, et al., from engaging in picketing at or in the vicinity of the Texas Company. Earlier in August, this Director filed a petition in the District Court for such relief and a temporary restraining order was entered by Judge Knoch, then sitting in the District Court.

A short time after that order was entered, respondents sought a subpoena for the Director's appearance, coupled with a subpoena duces tecum, requiring him to testify concerning the preliminary investigation alleged in the petition to have been conducted by him and under his supervision. He declined to produce his files and refused to testify concerning conduct of the preliminary investigation required by § 10(l) of the National Labor Relations Act, 61 Stat. 136, 29 U.S.C. § 141 et seq. Judge Perry, before whom this second phase of the case was developed then dismissed, on August 26, 1958, the petition for injunctive relief, finding inter alia:

"1. Conduct by petitioner of a preliminary investigation of the amended charge as required by Section (10(l) of the Act and Section 101.4 of the NLRB\'s Statements of Procedure prior to filing a petition for injunction based thereon is a condition precedent to petitioner\'s right to file a petition and is a jurisdictional requirement compliance with which respondents are entitled to challenge and litigate in this proceeding. * * *

"2. Petitioner is not by law entitled to withhold evidence as to its compliance with said jurisdictional requirement in this proceeding in which petitioner is invoking the court\'s aid and seeking judicial relief.

"3. Petitioner\'s refusal to testify and produce the evidence required by the subpoena deprives respondents of opportunity to establish a relevant defense, by due process of law. * * *"

On appeal from that order of August 26, 1958 a division of Judges, after hearing oral arguments entered an order, dated September 10, 1958 restraining the respondent Unions, until further order of this Court. About two weeks later an Associate General Counsel for the National Labor Relations Board filed a motion to dismiss the Director's appeal and vacate our injunction. We notice that this Counsel's name appears on the...