Indiana Civil Rights Commission v. International Union, United Auto., Aerospace and Agr. Implement Workers of America, UAW, 499
| Docket Nº | A |
| Citation | 385 N.E.2d 1176, 179 Ind.App. 407 |
| Case Date | February 19, 1979 |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Indiana |
Page 1176
J. Coleman, Loren O. Blaase, Lee A. Shelton, Mary E. Wyatt,
Dr. Nedra Kinerk, and John C. Carvey, Members of Aforesaid
Civil Rights Commission, and Linda Moore, Appellants
(Defendants Below),
v.
INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE AND
AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, UAW and United
Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of
America, UAW, Local Union No. 499, Appellees (Plaintiffs Below).
[179 Ind.App. 408]
Page 1177
Theo. L. Sendak, Atty. Gen., Dennis K. McKinney, Deputy Atty. Gen., Robert W. Lange, Indianapolis, for appellants.Lynnville G. Miles, Miles & Associates, Indianapolis, for appellees.
BUCHANAN, Chief Judge.
Defendants-appellants, the Indiana Civil Rights Commission and certain members thereof (ICRC), and Linda Moore (Moore) appeal from the trial court judgment which denied their motion to dismiss and set aside the ICRC order which found that the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW (the International) and the local union thereof (Local 499) engaged in an unlawful discriminatory practice within the meaning of Ind.Code 22-9-1-3(L ) and 22-9-1-6(k)(1).
We reverse.
Moore, a secretary for Local 499, was dismissed from her employment because she married a member of the Local in apparent violation of a collective bargaining agreement between Local 499 and her union. 1
[179 Ind.App. 409] Moore filed a complaint with the ICRC contending that by enforcing that section of the collective bargaining agreement Local 499 discriminated against her because of her sex. At the hearing on May 16, 1975, neither the International nor Local 499 appeared, and the ICRC entered an order of default. Following the subsequent hearing on damages the ICRC entered its final order against the International and Local 499.
The International and Local 499 filed petitions for judicial review on January 16, 1976 in the Delaware County Circuit Court against the ICRC. Moore was permitted to intervene and the cases were consolidated. The unions timely filed motions for extension of time within which to file the transcript of proceedings before the ICRC, pursuant to Ind.Code 4-22-1-14. The court granted an extension until March 5, 1976. The transcript was not filed within the granted extension. On August 26, 1976, Moore filed a motion to dismiss the petitions for review for failure to file a transcript within the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wright v. Dept. of Employment Services, 87-1346.
...First, an at will employment contract — like that at issue here — requires both voluntariness and mutuality to exist. See Batts, supra, 385 N.E.2d at 1176. Being at will, however, it can be unilaterally terminated by either party, see Wemhoff v. Investors Management Corp. of Am., 528 A.2d 1......
-
Indiana Civil Rights Com'n v. City of Muncie, 2-1082A350
...N.E.2d 153; White v. Bd. of Med. Regis. and Exam. (1956) 235 Ind. 572, 134 N.E.2d 556; Ind. Civil Rights Comm. v. Int'l. Union, (1979) 179 Ind.App. 407, 385 N.E.2d 1176; Gleason v. Real Estate Comm., (1973) 157 Ind.App. 344, 300 N.E.2d ICRC now attacks the jurisdiction of the Delaware Super......
-
Shipshewana Convenience Corp. v. Board of Zoning Appeals of LaGrange County, 44
...based on sex, Indiana Civil Rights Comm. v. United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (1979), 179 Ind.App. 407, 410, 385 N.E.2d 1176, 1178, trans. dismissed; discrimination based on religion, Indianapolis Yellow Cab v. Indiana Civil Rights Comm. (1991), Ind.......
-
Drake v. Indiana Dept. of Natural Resources, 1-183A2
...judicial review is grounds for dismissal based on a lack of jurisdiction. Indiana Civil Rights Commission v. International Union, (1979) 179 Ind.App. 407, 385 N.E.2d 1176. Without some type of transcript, the trial court cannot review the action taken by the administrative agency. The revie......