Scaglione v. Communications Workers of America, Local 1395

Decision Date05 March 1985
Docket NumberNo. 84-1921,84-1921
Citation759 F.2d 201
Parties119 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2057, 102 Lab.Cas. P 11,446 Joseph SCAGLIONE, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 1395, et al., Defendants, Appellees. . Heard
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit

Frederick T. Golder, Boston, Mass., with whom Golder & Shubow, P.A., Boston, Mass., was on brief, for appellant.

Thomas F. Birmingham, Boston, Mass., with whom Flamm & Birmingham, Boston, Mass., was on brief, for Communications Workers of America, Local 1395.

John H. Mason, Boston, Mass., with whom David J. Kerman and Ropes & Gray, Boston, Mass., were on brief, for AT & T Technologies, Inc.

Before CAMPBELL, Chief Judge, TORRUELLA, Circuit Judge and RE, * Judge.

PER CURIAM.

In Del Costello v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151, 103 S.Ct. 2281, 76 L.Ed.2d 476 (1983), the Supreme Court held that the six-month statute of limitations set forth in section 10(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 160(b), would apply to hybrid breach of duty of representation/breach of employment contract actions such as the case at bar. Although Del Costello was decided after Joseph Scaglione commenced this action, we recently held in Graves v. Smith's Transfer Corp., 736 F.2d 819 (1st Cir.1984), that the period of limitation announced in Del Costello would apply retroactively. Since we held in Simpson v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, 681 F.2d 81 (1st Cir.1982), that the decision to apply a holding retroactively, once made, governs all future applications of that holding, we are bound to apply the six-month period to Scaglione's claim, and will not entertain arguments that under the criteria laid out in Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson, 404 U.S. 97, 92 S.Ct. 349, 30 L.Ed.2d 296 (1971), its application to his particular situation is unwarranted.

The district court found after trial to the bench that Scaglione's cause of action against defendant Communications Workers of America, Local 1395, accrued before June 29, 1977. 586 F.Supp. 1018. This determination, amply supported by the evidence, bars Scaglione's action against the Local, which was not commenced until December 29, 1977. Scaglione does not challenge the district court's conclusion that his causes of action against defendant AT & T Technologies, Inc. must have accrued simultaneously with or prior to the accrual of his cause of action against the Local; these actions are...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Tucker v. Defense Mapping Agency
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Rhode Island
    • April 29, 1985
    ...contract/breach of fair representation claim, squarely within the DelCostello rubric. See Scaglione v. Communications Workers of America, Local 1395, 759 F.2d 201, 202 (1st Cir. 1985) (per curiam). Cf. Linder v. Berge, 577 F.Supp. 279, 281-82 (D.R.I.1983), aff'd, 739 F.2d 686, 688-89 (1st C......
  • Mouradian v. John Hancock Companies
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • August 30, 1988
    ...applicable to such claims. See Del-Costello v. Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151, 103 S.Ct. 2281, 76 L.Ed.2d 476 (1983); Scaglione v. CWA, 759 F.2d 201 (1st Cir.1985). Because plaintiff received notice of the Union's refusal to submit his termination grievance to arbitration no later than January 9, ......
  • U.S. v. Cresta, s. 85-1010
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • July 23, 1987
    ... ... Evid. Serv. 687 ... UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, ... Robert D. CRESTA, Defendant, ... that his son was relaying radio communications. It was agreed that Montaner would fly back to ... ...
  • Demars v. General Dynamics Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • December 11, 1985
    ...(W.D.Mich.1985); Scaglione v. Communications Workers of America, Local 1395, 586 F.Supp. 1018, 1021 (D.Mass.1983), aff'd, 759 F.2d 201 (1st Cir.1985) (per curiam). Here, the earliest Demars knew or should have known about the Union's purported breach of duty to him was July 23, 1982, when t......
  • 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