Mearns v. Lewis, 7856.
| Decision Date | 26 June 1959 |
| Docket Number | No. 7856.,7856. |
| Citation | 268 F.2d 427 |
| Parties | Harold A. MEARNS, Individually and doing business as Mearns Mining Company, Appellant, v. John L. LEWIS, Henry G. Schmidt and Josephine Roche, as Trustees of the United Mine Workers of America Welfare and Retirement Fund of 1950, Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
Howard Caplan, Clarksburg, W. Va. (Stotler, McReynolds & Caplan, Clarksburg, W. Va., on the brief), for appellant.
Charles L. Widman and Harold H. Bacon, Washington, D. C. (Louis D. Meisel, Fairmont, W. Va., Val J. Mitch, Washington, D. C., and M. E. Boiarsky, Charleston, W. Va., on the brief), for appellees.
Before SOBELOFF, Chief Judge, HAYNSWORTH, Circuit Judge, and THOMSEN, District Judge.
Judgment for $28,083.33 was recovered against the appellant, Mearns, a small independent coal mine owner, by the appellees, Trustees of the United Mine Workers of America Welfare and Retirement Fund. The claim was for 40 cents per ton royalties on coal mined between January 1, 1954, and November 6, 1956, under the provisions of the National Bituminous Coal Wage Collective Bargaining Agreement of 1950 as amended September 29, 1952. See Sec. 302(c) of the Taft-Hartley Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 186(c).
The defense was that fraudulent representations were made to him by negotiating agents of the United Mine Workers Union, which were relied upon by him, that the written contract was only a "formality" and that the 40 cents per ton royalty would not be insisted upon, but that he could pay only what he was financially able to pay.
We find no error in the disposition of this case, and adopt the District Court's opinion which fully discusses the facts and the law. See Lewis v. Mearns, 168 F.Supp. 134.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Idlewild Pharmacy, Inc.
...70 F.Supp. 836, 865 (D.C.Minn.1946), aff'd. 188 F.2d 277 (8th Cir. 1951); Lewis v. Mearns, 168 F.Supp. 134, 138 (N.D.W.Va.1958), aff'd. 268 F.2d 427; Lewis v. Kerns, 175 F.Supp. 115, 118 In Grymes v. Sanders et al., 93 U.S. 55, at page 62, 23 L.Ed. 798, it is said: Where a party desires to ......
-
C-B Buick, Inc. v. N.L.R.B.
...the Union may seek modification of the existing contract. An analysis of Mearns v. Lewis, 168 F.Supp. 134 (N.D.W.Va.1958) aff'd 268 F.2d 427 (4th Cir. 1959) and Local Union No. 600, United Auto Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW-CIO v. Ford Motor Co., 113 F.Supp. 834 ......
-
Lewis v. Lowry, 8298.
...D.Tenn.1958, 160 F.Supp. 221, affirmed 6 Cir., 1959, 264 F.2d 134; Lewis v. Mearns, D.C.N.D.W.Va.1958, 168 F.Supp. 134, affirmed 4 Cir., 1959, 268 F.2d 427; Lewis v. Quality Coal Corporation, 7 Cir., 1959, 270 F.2d 140, certiorari denied 1960, 361 U.S. 929, 80 S.Ct. 369, 4 L.Ed.2d 353; Lewi......
-
Lewis v. Seanor Coal Company, Civ. A. No. 65-861.
...of the Agreement on the part of the United Mine Workers of America, Lewis v. Mearns, 168 F.Supp. 134 (D.C.N.D. W.Va., 1958), affd. 268 F.2d 427 (4th Cir. 1959). The oral modification claimed by Defendant here would be contrary to Federal public policy enunciated by Congress in 29 U.S.C.A. §......