Flight Engineers Internat'l Ass'n v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc.
Decision Date | 30 March 1962 |
Docket Number | No. 19004.,19004. |
Citation | 301 F.2d 756 |
Parties | FLIGHT ENGINEERS INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION, EAL CHAPTER, Appellant, v. EASTERN AIR LINES, INC., et al., Appellees. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Richard H. M. Swann, Holladay & Swann, Miami, Fla., for appellant.
Charles M. Moon, Miami, Fla., W. Glen Harlan, Atlanta, Ga., Edward F. Boardman, U. S. Atty., Lloyd G. Bates, Jr., Alfred E. Sapp, Asst. U. S. Attys., Miami, Fla., for appellees.
Before RIVES, JONES and GEWIN, Circuit Judges.
This appeal is from an order holding Flight Engineers International Association, EAL Chapter in contempt and imposing upon it a fine of $25,000.00. The action was originated by a complaint filed by Eastern Air Lines, Inc., against Flight Engineers International Association, EAL Chapter and others, alleging that the defendants had called and were engaging in a strike or work stoppage of flight engineers at Eastern's Miami base and at its other bases, and that said strike or work stoppage is unlawful as a violation of the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq. The complaint prayed that the defendants be enjoined from calling or participating in the work stoppage, be ordered to rescind any instructions calling or sanctioning the work stoppage and to give notice to employees that there is no work stoppage against Eastern.
On the same day on which the complaint was filed, February 18, 1961, the district court issued a temporary restraining order, ex parte and without notice as prayed in the complaint, and set the matter down for further hearing on February 23. On motion of the plaintiff, Eastern Air Lines, an order to show cause why Flight Engineers International Association, EAL Chapter should not be adjudged in contempt for violation of the restraining order of February 18, was issued on February 20, returnable February 21, and two similar orders to show cause were issued on February 23, returnable respectively on that same day and on the next day, February 24. On February 23, the district court extended the temporary restraining order for a period of ten days.
On February 24, counsel for the plaintiff, Eastern Air Lines, Inc., advised the court, "that this contempt ceased as of yesterday evening." The judge responded that defendants' counsel had told him about it Eastern's counsel further stated to the court:
Further along in the hearing of February 24, the court stated: "I am going to hold the Flight Engineers of the EAL Chapter in contempt of this Court for disobedience of its order, and I will consider what action I shall take, and will probably set it down for another hearing." The hearing concluded with the court's direction to the United States Attorney, "I want you to report to me any criminal contempt in this case."
On March 3, the defendant, Flight Engineers International Association, EAL Chapter filed a motion to dissolve the temporary restraining order and to dismiss the complaint for the following reasons:
On March 6, a certified public accountant whom the court had requested to examine the books and records of Flight Engineers International Association, EAL Chapter, filed his report showing its financial condition and that it held a C.I.T. Note of the face value of $25,817.17.
On March 9, a written stipulation was entered into between the attorneys for plaintiff and for defendants, which was filed on March 10 and which stipulates:
In the same civil action, the district court on March 10, 1961, entered the order from which this appeal is prosecuted. The order is captioned: "ORDER IN CIVIL CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST FLIGHT ENGINEERS' INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION, EAL CHAPTER." The order provides:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Kave, In re
...criminal contemnor is entitled to notice that he is criminally charged. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 42(b); Flight Engineers Int'l Ass'n v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., 301 F.2d 756 (5th Cir.1962). Such a contemnor is also protected by a presumption of innocence that can only be overcome by proof beyond a......
-
Brotherhood of Loc. Fire. & Eng. v. Bangor & Aroostook R. Co.
...which had been conditionally imposed on April 2. This, then, is not the situation presented in Flight Engineers Internat'l Ass'n, etc., v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., 301 F.2d 756 (5th Cir. 1962), upon which appellants rely. In that case, a contempt was adjudicated and a fine subsequently impo......
-
Louisiana Ed. Ass'n v. Richland Parish Sch. Bd.
...the court initiates a criminal contempt proceeding. 11 Wright & Miller § 2960 at 587-88; cf. Flight Engineers International Association v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., 301 F.2d 756 (5th Cir. 1962); FTC v. A. McLean & Son, 94 F.2d 802 (7th Cir. 1938). The aggrieved party benefits from the court'......
-
FLIGHT ENGINEERS'INTER. ASS'N v. American Airlines, Inc.
...Association, commonly referred to as ALPA likewise a constituent member of AFL-CIO. 5 See Flight Engineers International Association, EAL Chapter v. Eastern Airlines, 5 Cir., 1962, 301 F.2d 756, in which we reversed a $25,000 fine against this Union for refusal to obey a similar injunction ......