McFadden v. Baltimore Steamship Trade Assoc., 73-1280.

Decision Date30 August 1973
Docket NumberNo. 73-1280.,73-1280.
Citation483 F.2d 452
PartiesGarris S. McFADDEN, Appellant v. BALTIMORE STEAMSHIP TRADE ASSOCIATION et al., Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

Whitworth Stokes, Washington, D.C., on brief for appellant.

A. Adgate Duer, Barrett W. Freedlander, Niles, Barton & Wilmer, Baltimore, Md., on brief for appellees Steamship Trade Association of Baltimore, Inc., and Terminal Shipping Co.

Anthony A. Abato, Jr., Cosimo C. Abato, Bracken & Abato, P. A., Baltimore, Md., on brief for appellees International Longshoremen's Assn., Local 953 and International Longshoremen's Assn.

Before RUSSELL, FIELD and WIDENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is from a judgment dismissing a complaint for damages and injunctive relief filed in the district court by Garris S. McFadden against the International Longshoremen's Association, one of its locals, and the Terminal Shipping Company. In his complaint McFadden alleged that the ILA and Local 953 denied him membership in the local and employment as a checker because of his race, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1), and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 1981. In addition he alleged that Terminal fired him from employment in retaliation for filing charges of discrimination in 1969 against Terminal, the Steamship Trade Association of Baltimore, Inc.,1 and a number of other stevedoring companies in Baltimore, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a). The case was tried before the district judge who found that McFadden was not entitled to the relief sought and entered judgment for the defendants, 352 F.Supp. 403. Specifically, the court found that the denial of membership in Local 953 to McFadden was in no way arbitrary or discriminatory or that the unions in question breached their duty to fairly represent him in obtaining membership. The court further found that contrary to McFadden's assertion of retaliation he was fired for pilferage. We think the record fully supports these findings and we refuse to upset them as clearly erroneous. See Glasscock v. United States, 323 F.2d 589 (4th Cir. 1963).

Accordingly, we grant the motion for summary affirmance and affirm the judgment.

Affirmed.

1 Initially STA was named as a defendant, the allegation being that it was involved in the alleged discriminatory practices on the part of ILA and Local 953. The district court, however, found that it was...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Byrd v. Local Union No. 24, Int. Bro. of Electrical Wkrs.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maryland
    • 19 Marzo 1974
    ...5 and 6. The ultimate decision of Judge Harvey in McFadden is reported in 352 F. Supp. 403 (1973), and was affirmed per curiam, 483 F.2d 452 (4th Cir. 1973). McFadden is not apposite to the factual allegations of the amended and intervening complaints relating to the contractor associations......
  • Equal Emp. Op. Com'n v. Kallir, Philips, Ross, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 31 Julio 1975
    ...opinion, 492 F.2d 1240 (4th Cir. 1974); McFadden v. Baltimore S.S. Trade Assoc., 352 F.Supp. 403, 411-12 (D.Md.1973), aff'd 483 F.2d 452 (4th Cir. 1973); Barnes v. Lerner Shops of Texas, Inc., 323 F.Supp. 617, 622 (S.D.Tex. 1971). 17 Even if defendant was in part motivated by this incident,......
  • EEOC v. Nicholson File Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Connecticut
    • 19 Enero 1976
    ...Brands, Inc., 431 F.2d 455 (5th Cir. 1970) and McFadden v. Baltimore Steamship Trade Ass'n, 352 F.Supp. 403 (D.Md.), aff'd, 483 F.2d 452 (4th Cir. 1973). If this is the case the complaint must be dismissed, since the charge was filed well over 210 days after the events However, this court d......
  • Mazus v. Department of Transp., Com. of Pa.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • 2 Octubre 1980
    ...cert. denied, 435 U.S. 945, 98 S.Ct. 1527, 55 L.Ed.2d 542 (1978) (other applicants more qualified); McFadden v. Baltimore Steamship Trade Association, 483 F.2d 452, 453 (4th Cir. 1973) (pilferage by plaintiff). Just as an employer could not defend its discriminatory hiring practices by rely......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT