Jencks v. Goforth, 5587

• Decision Date: 25 September 1953
• Docket Number: No. 5587,5587
• Citation: 261 P.2d 655,57 N.M. 627
• Parties: JENCKS et al. v. GOFORTH, Sheriff.
• Court: New Mexico Supreme Court

Page 655

261 P.2d 655

57 N.M. 627

JENCKS et al. v. GOFORTH, Sheriff.

No. 5587.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

Sept. 25, 1953.

Hannett & Hannett, W. S. Lindamood, Albuquerque, for petitioner.

C. C. Royall, Sr., Hubert O. Robertson, J. R. Wrinkle, Silver City, amici curiae for respondent.

SEYMOUR, Justice.

This litigation arose out of a strike on the part of the members of the International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers against their employer, The New Jersey Zinc Company. The strike was of long duration.

Matters related to this strike already have been before this Court and decision made in New Jersey Zinc Co. v. Local 890 of International Union, etc., 1952, 56 N.M. 447, 245 P.2d 156. In this Court for decision at the present time are four other matters stemming from the same strike, being causes numbered 5579, 5587, 5626 and 5653.

The basic litigation in this series of cases was civil action numbered 12,812, filed June 12, 1951 in the District Court of Grant County, New Mexico, by The New Jersey Zinc Company, a corporation, plaintiff, v. Local 890 of International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers, its officers, agents and members, and International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers, its officers, agents and employees, defendants. The action was in equity, seeking a temporary restraining order enjoining defendants from trespassing on plaintiff's property and from blocking roads and other entrances to the property of plaintiff in such a manner as to restrain or coerce employees of plaintiff from returning to work; prayer was made for an order to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not be issued until final hearing could be had on application for a permanent injunction.

On the same day, June 12, 1951, the trial court issued the temporary restraining order and set hearing upon the temporary injunction for June 20, 1951. Hearing on application for permanent injunction was set for the same time and place. The relevant portion of the temporary restraining order reads as follows:

'It is, therefore, by the Court, considered, ordered and adjudged that defendants and each of them be, and they are hereby enjoined and restrained, until the further order of this Court, from trespasing upon plaintiff's property and blocking the roads and other entrances to the property of plaintiff in such manner as to restrain or coerce the employees of plaintiff from returning to work.'

Hearing was had June 21, 1951 through June 26, 1951 and, on June 30, 1951, the trial court, in letter form, gave its decision that the temporary restraining order should be made permanent and directed counsel to submit findings of fact, conclusions of law and a formal order.

On July 9, 1951 there were filed the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the trial court, and the order of the court granting permanent injunction, the relevant portion of which reads as follows:

'1. That defendants and each of them, and their wives, mothers, sisters and children as their agents, be and they are hereby permanently enjoined and restrained from trespassing upon plaintiff's property and blocking the roads and other entrances to the property of plaintiff in such manner as to restrain, coerce or prevent the employees of plaintiff from returning to work, or from illegally attempting to keep said employees from continuing in their employment with plaintiff.'

No appeal was taken from nor was any attack made upon the decision in the trial court in this basic cause of action in equity.

The matters already decided and for decision in this Court all arose out of contempt proceedings initiated by reason of alleged violations by defendants of the terms of the temporary restraining order and of the permanent injunction.

On July 11, 1951, two days after the permanent injunction, plaintiff filed its motion for an order to show cause, seeking to have defendants held in contempt for violation of the temporary restraining order; the order was issued and hearing set for July 20, 1951. After hearing, and on July 23, 1951, the trial court gave its memorandum decision and entered its decree finding both the Local 890 and the International Union, and six individual defendants guilty of contempt, levying fines of $4,000 each against the two unions and sentencing the individuals to ninety days in jail. It was further provided that one-half of each fine was to be remitted provided defendants refrained from blocking the road, and jail sentences to be suspended provided the individuals refrained from the forbidden activities for one year commencing July 25, 1951. The relevant portion of the decree is as follows:

'3. That there be and hereby is assessed against defendant International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers a fine in the sum of Four Thousand ($4,000.00) Dollars to be paid to the Clerk of this Court; one-half of this fine will be remitted provided this defendant, its Officers, Agents and Employees refrain from blocking or causing to be blocked the road which is involved in this case that goes off the new Santa Rita highway west of the railroad through the premises of the plaintiff to Fierro, and refrain from otherwise violating the provisions of the Permanent Injunction of July 9, 1951, for a period of one year commencing July 25, 1951.

'4. That the defendants Clinton E. Jencks, Cipriano Montoya, Ernest Velasquez, Vincente Becerra, Pablo Montoya and Fred Barreras do each of them receive and they are hereby given a sentence of ninety (90) days in the common jail of Grant County, New Mexico; this sentence will be suspended provided said defendants and each of them cause the road which is involved in this case that goes off the new Santa Rita highway west of the railroad through the premises of the plaintiff up to Fierro to be opened to unobstructed travel by the general public and the officials and employees of plaintiff going to and returning from work, and otherwise cause the provisions of the Permanent Injunction of July 9, 1951 to be complied with by the members of said Local 890, its members and agents, for a period of one year commencing July 25, 1951.'

Appeal was taken and the decree in the contempt proceedings was affirmed in New Jersey Zinc Co. v. Local 890 of International Union, etc., supra. This particular contempt decree, however, is still before this Court on writ of error, cause numbered 5579, 57 N.M. ----, 261 P.2d 654, and writ of habeas corpus, cause numbered 5587, the latter cause being the subject of this decision.

Although causes numbered 5626 and 5653 in this Court are not here decided and will be the subject of separate opinions, 57 N.M. ----, 261 P.2d 648, 57 N.M. ----, 261 P.2d 654 reference will be made to the foregoing statement and, for the sake of clarity, their positions in the history of the litigation arising out of the strike should be made clear at this time.

Cause numbered 5653 arises out of another motion for order to show cause filed December 5, 1951, seeking to have defendants held in contempt for violation of the permanent injunction of July 9, 1951, the alleged violations occurring July 10 to December 5 inclusive, 1951; hearing was had during the period January 14, 1952 and January 31, 1952. The trial court's decree was entered March 10, 1952 finding the defendants guilty of contempt and levying specific fines in varying amounts, totalling $31,870, in part against the unions and in part against specific individuals, to be paid to the clerk of the court for the use and benefit of the plaintiff as compensation for its losses and damages by reason of the violation of the permanent injunction. Appeal was granted, which matter constitutes cause numbered 5653 in this Court.

Cause numbered 5626 arises out of another motion for order to show cause filed December 18, 1951, seeking to have defendants held in contempt for violation of the permanent injunction of July 9, 1951, the alleged violations occurring December 6 through December 18, inclusive, 1951; hearing was had February 28 and 29, 1952; decision of the trial court was rendered March 10, 1952, finding the defendants guilty of contempt and levying specific fines in varying amounts, totalling $5,720, in part against the unions and in part against specific individuals, to be paid to the clerk of the court for the use and benefit of the plaintiff as compensation for its losses and damages by reason of the violation of the permanent injunction. Appeal was granted, which matter constitutes cause numbered 5626 in this Court.

Basically, the grounds of appeal in causes numbered 5653 and 5626 are identical; in an abbreviated form, they are: The strike, out of which all of this litigation arose, was settled between January 22 and January 28, 1952, during a recess in the trial of cause numbered 5653, and several weeks prior to the trial of cause numbered 5626; the picket line was withdrawn; the labor dispute between the parties having been terminated and the picket line having been removed, the cause for the original injunction ceased to exist, and it is contended that the trial court was without jurisdiction to proceed with the civil contempt proceedings which culminated in the two contempt decrees of March 10, 1952. It is also contended that the trial court erred in awarding plaintiff relief in the form of compensatory damages.

The legal questions raised in causes numbered 5653 and 5626 differ entirely from those raised in the writs of error and habeas corpus, the latter of which is the subject of this opinion and which is now considered.

The matter of the writ of habeas corpus will be determined first because, if this Court should find in favor of the applicants, the reason for the writ of error and a review of the contempt proceedings no longer exists, and the questions raised therein need not be decided.

New Jersey Zinc Co. v. Local 890 of International Union, etc., supra, affirmed the contempt decree of July 23, 1951, the relevant...