Amer. F. of L. et al. v. Bain et al

Decision Date24 September 1940
Citation106 P.2d 544,165 Or. 183
PartiesAMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR ET AL. <I>v.</I> BAIN ET AL. CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS ET AL. <I>v.</I> BAIN ET AL.
CourtOregon Supreme Court

RAND, C.J., dissenting.

                  What amounts to picketing, note, 83 A.L.R. 200. See, also
                16 R.C.L. 453 (6 Perm. Supp. 4091)
                  11 C.J.S., Breach of the Peace, § 2
                

In Banc.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County.

ROBERT TUCKER, JAMES T. BRAND, and ARTHUR D. HAY, Judges.

Proceedings under the uniform declaratory judgment statute by the American Federation of Labor, an unincorporated association, and others against James R. Bain, District Attorney of Multnomah County, Oregon, and others, wherein the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, an unincorporated association, and others intervened, and by the Congress of Industrial Organizations, an unincorporated association, and others, against the same defendants to determine the constitutionality of a statute relating to labor disputes. From decrees dismissing the suits, plaintiffs and intervenors appeal.

REVERSED.

B.A. Green and Chris H. Boesen, both of Portland (Joseph A. Padway, of Washington, D.C., and James Landye and R.K. Powell, both of Portland, on the brief), for American Federation of Labor.

Gus J. Solomon, of Portland (Lee Pressman, Joseph Kovner, and Anthony Wayne Smith, all of Washington, D.C., on the brief), for Congress of Industrial Organizations.

Alfred A. Hampson, of Portland, and Willis S. Moore, Assistant Attorney General (James R. Bain District Attorney, Frank S. Sever, and Clarence A. Potts, Deputy District Attorneys, R.R. Morris, I.H. Van Winkle, Attorney General, L.E. Latourette, City Attorney, and Alexander G. Brown, Deputy City Attorney, all of Portland, on the brief), for respondents.

Osmond K. Fraenkel and Nathan Greene, both of New York City, amici curiae for American Civil Liberties Union.

LUSK, J.

REVERSED.

LUSK, J.

The court is called upon in these cases to determine the constitutionality of a statute enacted by the voters at the general election held November 8, 1938, relating to labor disputes: Ch. 2, Oregon Laws, 1939. The proceedings are under the uniform declaratory judgment statute: Title II, Ch. XIV, Oregon Code 1930. One suit was filed by the American Federation of Labor, its officers and affiliated organizations; another by the Congress of Industrial Organizations, its officers and various affiliates. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen and three other railroad unions, known as the "Railroad Brotherhoods", intervened in the suit filed by the American Federation of Labor and joined in the attack on the statute. The defendants are the district attorney and the sheriff of Multnomah county, the chief of police of the city of Portland, and the attorney general of the state of Oregon.

The cases were consolidated and heard by a court composed of three circuit judges sitting in banc, who filed an elaborate and carefully considered opinion sustaining the validity of the law, and entered decrees dismissing the suits, from which these appeals are taken.

The law with its title reads:

"AN ACT

"To protect the employee, the employer and the public in case of labor controversies; to define the term `labor dispute'; to regulate collective bargaining agencies; to protect persons not direct ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
39 cases
  • Shively v. Garage Employees Local Union No. 44
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • December 12, 1940
    ... ... by the people of Oregon at the general election in 1938 ... American Federation of Labor v. Bain et al. (Brotherhood ... of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen et al., Congress of ... Industrial Organizations et al. v. Bain), 106 P.2d ... ...
  • Green v. Obergfell
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • March 17, 1941
    ...8 Cir., 96 F.2d 478, 480, 481; 1 Teller, Labor Disputes and Collective Bargaining (1940) § 220. 21 Cf. American Federation of Labor v. Bain, Or., 106 P.2d 544, 555, 130 A.L.R. 1278: "It is insisted, though not by the defendants, that this statute should be sustained as a valid exercise of t......
  • Gilbertson v. Culinary Alliance and Bartenders' Union, Local No. 643, A.F. of L.
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • March 30, 1955
    ...abridgment by a state. Schneider v. State of New Jersey, 308 U.S. 147, 60 S.Ct. 146, 84 L.Ed. 155. American Federation of Labor v. Bain, 165 Or. 183, 106 P.2d 544, 547, 130 A.L.R. 1278, is cited ad decisive of the question. In that case we held that a statute, enacted by the people under th......
  • Alabama State Federation of Labor v. McAdory
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • May 25, 1944
    ... ... The ... principle recognized by the Oregon Court in American ... Federation of Labor v. Bain, 165 Or. 183, 106 P.2d 544, 555, ... 130 A.L.R. 1278, holding invalid a statute which prohibited ... picketing by a minority of the employees of a ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT