Jensen v. St. Paul Moving Picture Mach. Operators' Local Union No. 356

• Decision Date: 22 March 1935
• Docket Number: 29973.
• Citation: 259 N.W. 811,194 Minn. 58
• Parties: JENSEN et al. v. ST. PAUL MOVING PICTURE MACHINE OPERATORS' LOCAL UNION NO. 356 et al.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

259 N.W. 811

194 Minn. 58

JENSEN et al. v. ST. PAUL MOVING PICTURE MACHINE OPERATORS' LOCAL UNION NO. 356 et al.

No. 29973.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

March 22, 1935

Appeal from District Court, Ramsey County; Kenneth G. Brill, Judge.

Action by A. O. Jensen and others against St. Paul Moving Picture Machine Operators' Local Union No. 256 and others. From a decree granting a permanent injunction, defendants appeal.

Affirmed.

Cause of action of moving picture machine operators' union against theater owners for damages on ground operation of machine by defendants themselves constituted breach of contract to employ only union operators held not " labor dispute" within statute prohibiting issuance of injunction against picketing in cases involving or growing out of labor disputes. M.S.A. §§ 185.10, 185.18.

Syllabus by the Court .

A claim for damages for past breach of contract is not a ‘ labor dispute’ within the terms of chapter 416, Laws 1933, and an injunction to prohibit picketing to force a settlement is not forbidden by that chapter.

Charles A. Lethert, of St. Paul, for appellants.

O'Brien & Quinlivan, of St. Paul, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

This case comes here on appeal from a permanent injunction restraining defendants from picketing the plaintiffs' theater.

Prior to May, 1933, plaintiffs had employed an operator for their moving picture machine who was not a member of defendant union, although they had paid to the union a sum equal to the dues of a member. On that day they entered into an agreement with the St. Paul local union by which they agreed to employ only moving picture machine operators furnished by that union and from that date until the 26th of June, 1933, they employed such an operator. They then dispensed with the services of an employed operator and themselves operated their moving picture machine. The agreement with the local union terminated September 1, 1933, but the union continued to picket the theater as ‘ unfair,’ as it had done from June 26th. This action followed. It was evidently the contention of the plaintiffs that the agreement did not bind them to employ an operator, but that if they did employ one, he must be furnished by the local union. The local union took the position that plaintiffs bound themselves to employ union operators until September 1, 1933. Which construction of the contract was right is not important here. It is conceded by appellants...