Carpenter Baking Co. v. Bakery Sales Drivers Local Union No. 344

• Decision Date: 07 October 1941
• Parties: CARPENTER BAKING CO. v. BAKERY SALES DRIVERS LOCAL UNION NO. 344 (A. F. OF L.) et al.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

238 Wis. 367

299 N.W. 30

CARPENTER BAKING CO.

v.BAKERY SALES DRIVERS LOCAL UNION NO. 344 (A. F. OF L.) et al.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

June 25, 1941.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 7, 1941.

See 300 N.W. 225.

Appeal from a judgment of the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County; Wm. F. Shaughnessy, Judge.

Affirmed.

Action by Carpenter Baking Company, a corporation, plaintiff, against Bakery Sales Drivers Local Union No. 344, Auto Truck Drivers Joint Council No. 50, Elmer Johnson, Joseph Reichartz, Gilbert Schlechta, and G. McMicken, defendants, commenced on August 15, 1940, to restrain defendants from conduct calculated to coerce and intimidate plaintiff's employees; from following plaintiff's employees and delivery trucks while the trucks were being used to deliver bakery products to customers; and from inciting and attempting to persuade persons not to deal with plaintiff or plaintiff's employees. The complaint alleged that plaintiff's employees are engaged in the sale and delivery of its products; have refused to designate defendant Bakery Sales Drivers Local Union No. 344 as bargaining representative; that no labor dispute exists between plaintiff and its employees; that defendants entered a conspiracy contrary to the provisions of sec. 343.681, Stats., to injure plaintiff's trade and business for the purpose of compelling plaintiff to coerce its employees to become members of defendant unions. The complaint alleges that in furtherance of the conspiracy defendants in cars followed the delivery trucks of plaintiff and sought to dissuade plaintiff's customers from purchasing bakery products sold by plaintiff's employees on the ground that the employee was not a member of defendant unions. The answer alleged that plaintiff had engaged in conduct which was in violation of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq., and had been found guilty of such conduct by an intermediate report of an examiner of the National Labor Relations Board after public hearing. The answer further set forth that the conduct of defendants was merely a peaceful and truthful advertisement of the fact that plaintiff's employees were not members of the defendant Bakery Sales Drivers Union. Defendants further set up that insofar as any of defendants' actions are violations of chapter 111 and sections 103.535 and 103.62 (3), Stats., these statutes are unconstitutional and void; that assuming that they are not, chapters 111 and 103, Stats., are inapplicable because plaintiff is engaged in interstate commerce and plaintiff does not come into court with clean...