Hettenbaugh v. Airline Pilots Ass'n International, 13305.
| Decision Date | 01 June 1951 |
| Docket Number | No. 13305.,13305. |
| Citation | 189 F.2d 319 |
| Parties | HETTENBAUGH et al. v. AIRLINE PILOTS ASS'N INTERNATIONAL. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Thomas H. Anderson, Miami, Fla., Jack R. Courshon, Miami Beach, Fla., for appellant.
G. Kenneth Kemper, Carl T. Hoffman, Miami, Fla., for appellee.
Before HOLMES, McCORD and RUSSELL, Circuit Judges.
This appeal is from an order dismissing a complaint brought by appellants against the Airline Pilots Association International, a voluntary unincorporated association. The only ground of dismissal that we need to notice is lack of jurisdiction in the United States district court. The following pertinent facts are alleged in the complaint:
Richard J. Hettenbaugh and 48 others were employed as pilots for the National Airlines, Inc., a Florida corporation, which was subject to the terms of the Railway Labor Act.1 The appellee, an unincorporated association existing under the laws of Illinois and domiciled in Chicago, was the bargaining agent of all the pilots. On December 9, 1941, the appellee entered into a written collective bargaining agreement with the National Airlines, Inc., which agreement, as renewed and amended, has remained in full force and effect at all times material hereto. The appellee had other bargaining contracts with other airlines, and was the recognized collective bargaining agent of airline pilots flying for common carriers in the United States.
As a result of a controversy between National Airlines, Inc., and the appellee, concerning the discharge of one Maston O'Neal, the National Airline Pilots Association struck on February 3, 1948. In order to keep the line going, the company employed the appellants from the date of the strike until November 24, 1948, when the striking pilots went back to work. The complaint charges that the appellee, notwithstanding its obligation to the appellants, has discriminated against them by wilfully and wrongfully refusing to allow its members to fly with them as pilots or co-pilots, by refusing to bargain for or act on behalf of them, by causing a complaint to be filed with the Civil Aeronautics Board to the effect that it constituted a threat to aerial navigation for the appellants to fly with members of its association, by threatening to cause strikes on other airlines that might hire the appellants, and by threatening to call a strike on National Airlines if it should reemploy the appellants, who went to work after the strike of February 3, 1948. The complaint further charges the appellee with having deliberately violated the obligations imposed on it by said Railway Labor Act, and with having prevented the continuance of peaceful working conditions between its members and the several appellants. On March 22, 1950, appellants brought this suit seeking to enjoin the appellee from continuing to act as the bargaining agent for the personnel employed by National Airlines; also for an accounting and damages. From a judgment of dismissal as aforesaid, the plaintiffs appealed to this court.
We are of the opinion that the complaint does not have a sufficient showing of diversity of citizenship or of a federal question to warrant a federal court in taking jurisdiction. No diversity of citizenship is alleged. All that is stated in the complaint is that the plaintiffs are citizens of Florida, and that the defendant is a voluntary unincorporated association existing under the laws of Illinois, with its domicile in the City of Chicago. No allegation is made as to the residence or citizenship of the members of the unincorporated association. It is well settled that, for the purposes of federal jurisdiction, an unincorporated association is not a citizen of any particular state in its own...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Haley v. Childers
...82 S.Ct. 397, 7 L.Ed.2d 387; Latham v. Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, 2 Cir., 274 F.2d 507 (1960); Hettenbaugh v. Airline Pilots Ass'n International, 5 Cir., 189 F.2d 319 (1951); Brooks v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co., 8 Cir., 177 F.2d 385 (1949); La France v. Brotherhood of Loco. Fire.......
-
Welch v. Pen Air Fed. Credit Union
...when determining diversity of citizenship concerning non-corporate entities formed under state law); Hettenbaugh v. Airline Pilots Ass'n Int'l, 189 F.2d 319, 320 (5th Cir. 1951)7 ("It is well settled that, for the purposes of federal jurisdiction, an unincorporated association is not a citi......
-
Lowry v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD, ETC.
...Para. 17.25. For cases, see Thomas v. Board of Trustees, 1904, 195 U.S. 207, 25 S.Ct. 24, 49 L.Ed. 160; Hattenbaugh v. Airline Pilots Ass'n International, 5 Cir., 1951, 189 F.2d 319; Rosendale v. Phillips, 2 Cir., 1937, 87 F.2d 454; Levering & Garrigues Co. v. Morrin, 2 Cir., 1932, 61 F.2d ......
-
Mungin v. Florida East Coast Railway Company
...the Railway Labor Act and there is a requirement to exhaust grievance, or Railway Board of Adjustment, remedies. Nor was it one making a Hettenbaugh30 Rather, this case, as those in Ops 1, 2, 3, and 4, is one in which there was a complete abrogation of the collective bargaining agreement an......