Cox v. Administrator U.S. Steel & Carnegie
| Decision Date | 19 August 1994 |
| Docket Number | 92-6218,Nos. 91-7215,AFL-CIO-CLC and USX,s. 91-7215 |
| Parties | 147 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2012 Leslie Ray COX; R.M. Cox; Larry Driver; Barry Nichols; John Bullard; Robert W. Kennedy, Jr.; Lorenzo G. East; Clarence M. Pope, Jr.; C.R. Altes; Jack E. Merrymon; Terry P. West; R.S. Arnold; M.W. Milstead; J.W. Wade; Manning A.C. Snider; Terry H. Melvin; Thomas E. Hill; Gary D. Swann; Ronald E. Frazier; Anthony J. Crapet; Robert M. Green; Heath L. McMeans, III; Billy Carter; Joe A. Knight; Phillip L. Drummond; Brack Wells; George Boglin; Dennis E. Jones; Dennis R. Fulton; Don L. Flurry; W.T. Mayberry; Willie Young; Robert Poole; Wardell Clark; Willie J. Nation; Oscar Lee Perry; Harry S. Turner and James R. Miller, suing individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, etc., Plaintiffs-Appellees, Cross-Appellants, v. ADMINISTRATOR UNITED STATES STEEL & CARNEGIE and United States Steel & Carnegie Pension Fund, Defendants, United Steelworkers of America,Corporation, a/k/a United States Steel Corporation, Defendants-Appellants, Cross-Appellees. Leslie Ray COX; R.M. Cox; Larry Driver; Barry Nichols; John Bullard; Robert W. Kennedy, Jr.; Lorenzo G. East; Clarence M. Pope, Jr.; C.R. Altes; Jack E. Merrymon; Terry P. West; R.S. Arnold; M.W. Milstead; J.W. Wade; Manning A.C. Snider; Terry H. Melvin; Thomas E. Hill; Gary D. Swann; Ronald E. Frazier; Anthony J. Crapet; Robert M. Green; Heath L. McMeans, III; Billy Carter; Joe A. Knight; Phillip L. Drummond; Brack Wells; George Boglin; Dennis E. Jones; Dennis R. Fulton; Don L. Flurry; W.T. Mayberry; Willie Young; Robert Poole; Wardell Clark; Willie J. Nation; Oscar Lee Perry; Harry S. Turner and James R. Miller, suing individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, etc., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. ADMINISTRATOR UNITED STATES STEEL & CARNEGIE and United States Steel & Carnegie Pension Fund; United Steelworkers of America,Corporation, a/k/a United States Steel Corporation, Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit |
Carl B. Frankel, Associate Gen. Counsel, United Steelworkers of America, Pittsburgh, PA, Robert M. Weinberg, Jeremiah A. Collins, Martin S. Lederman, Bredhoff & Kaiser, Washington, DC, Samuel H. Heldman, in # 92-6218, Jerome A. Cooper, Joe R. Whatley, Jr., Franklin G. Shuler, Jr., Cooper, Mitch, Crawford, Kuykendall & Whatley, Birmingham, AL, for United Steelworkers of America.
Michael L. Lucas, Burr & Forman, William N. Clark, Redden, Mills & Clark, Birmingham, AL, Robert W. Hartland, Leonard L. Scheinholtz, Reed, Smith, Shaw & McClay, Pittsburgh, PA, J. Michael Jarboe, USX Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, in # 91-7215, for USX Corp.
J. Vernon Patrick, Jr., Alex S. Lacy, William M. Acker, III, Elizabeth N. Pitman, Patrick & Lacy, P.C., Samuel Maples, Michael H. Bite, Jr., Bite, Bite and Bite, Birmingham, AL, for Leslie Ray Cox, et al.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.
Before ANDERSON and CARNES, Circuit Judges, and SCHLESINGER *, District Judge.
ON PETITIONS FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTIONS FOR REHEARING EN BANC
Upon consideration of the petitions for rehearing, the opinion issued on April 5, 1994, and published at 17 F.3d 1386, is modified as follows:
(1) The second paragraph of section II.B.1.b, which is found at 17 F.3d at 1398, and begins "Under Sec. 1962(c) it is unlawful....", is deleted. In its place is substituted the following paragraph:
Under Sec. 1962(c) it is unlawful for "any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity." USX argues that a jury could not find a violation of that subsection because USX cannot be both the "person" and the "enterprise" contemplated by Sec. 1962(c). However, the plaintiffs have alleged only that USX conducted the affairs of the Fairfield Works, the Union, District 36 of the Union, and the Fund through a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Loggerhead Turtle v. County Counc., Volusia County
...1347, 1349 (11th Cir.1996) (quoting Cox v. Administrator U.S. Steel & Carnegie, 17 F.3d 1386, 1396, modified on other grounds, 30 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1110, 115 S.Ct. 900, 130 L.Ed.2d 784 (1995)). Summary judgment is appropriate where, like in the instant actio......
-
Gunderson v. ADM Investor Services, Inc., No. C96-3148-MWB (N.D. Iowa 2/13/2001)
...that under the non-identity rule "the RICO defendant and the RICO enterprise cannot be one and the same"), modified on reh'g, 30 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 1994), cert. denied sub nom. USX Corp. v. Cox, 513 U.S. 1110 (1995). This requirement stems from the statute's language, which distinguishes ......
-
Economic Dev. v. Arthur Andersen & Co.
...such liability. See, e.g., Cox v. Administrator U.S. Steel & Carnegie, 17 F.3d 1386, 1410 (11th Cir.), modified on other grounds, 30 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir.1994), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 115 S.Ct. 900, 130 L.Ed.2d 784 (1995); U.S. v. Rastelli, 870 F.2d 822, 832 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 493......
-
Iron Workers Ins. Fund v. Philip Morris Inc.
...property. See Cox v. Administrator, U.S. Steel & Carnegie, 17 F.3d 1386, 1399 (11th Cir.), modified per curiam on other grounds, 30 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1110, 115 S.Ct. 900, 130 L.Ed.2d 784 (1995); Mid Atlantic, 18 F.3d at 263.50 Plaintiffs' evidence is sufficie......
-
Privilege and work product
...motion to compel); Cox v. Administrator United States Steel & Carnegie , 17 F.3d 1386, 1422 n.41 (11th Cir.), modified on other grounds , 30 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 1994); Jinks-Umstead v. England , 231 F.R.D. 13 (D.D.C. 2005). Cobell v. Norton , 213 F.R.D. 69 (D.D.C. 2003). However, productio......
-
Privileges
...& Carnegie , 17 F.3d 1386, 1422-23 (11th Cir. 1994) (subject matter waiver does not apply to work product), modified on other grounds, 30 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 1994); Guarantee Ins. Co. v. Heffernan Ins. Brokers, Inc., 300 F.R.D. 590, 599 (S.D. Fla. 2014) (“Due to the sensitive nature of wor......
-
Privilege and work product
...motion to compel); Cox v. Administrator United States Steel & Carnegie , 17 F.3d 1386, 1422 n.41 (11th Cir.), modified on other grounds , 30 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 1994); Jinks-Umstead v. England , 231 F.R.D. 13 (D.D.C. 2005). Cobell v. Norton , 213 F.R.D. 69 (D.D.C. 2003). However, productio......
-
Employment-related crimes.
...1994) (holding mere request by union's negotiators for unearned pension benefits violated [section] 186(b)), modified on other grounds, 30 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. (191.) See United States v. Rastelli, 870 F.2d 822, 829 (2d Cir. 1989) (holding evidence defendants attended payoff meetings, recei......