U.S. v. International Broth. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, AFL-CIO

• Decision Date: 27 June 1990
• Docket Number: AFL-CI,1629,1605,1472,1573,1476,1572,1591,1565,1619,1473,1469,1604,1578,1464,AFL-CIO,1468,1603,1470,1630,1571,1466,1462,1569,1590,Nos. 1348,1481,1592,1606,1594,1474,1480,1602,1570,1475,1631 and 1802,D,1593,1465,1467,1471,1463,s. 1348
• Citation: 907 F.2d 277
• Parties: 134 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3172, 59 USLW 2034, 115 Lab.Cas. P 10,144 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA,et al., Defendants. Appeal of INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFERS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA,efendant. Appeal of HIGHWAY & LOCAL MOTOR FREIGHT DRIVERS, DOCKMEN AND HELPERS, LOCAL UNION 707, et al. ockets 90-6038, 6046, 6048, 6056, 6058, 6060, 6064, 6066, 6068, 6070, 6074, 6076, 6078, 6080, 6082, 6084, 6086, 6088, 6090, 6094, 6096, 6098, 6100, 6102, 6106, 6108, 6110, 6112, 6114, 6116, 6118, 6120, 6122, 6124, 6126, 6128, 6130, 6132, 6134 and 6140.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

Page 277

907 F.2d 277

134 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3172, 59 USLW 2034,

115 Lab.Cas. P 10,144

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO et al., Defendants Appeal of INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFERS WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, Defendant Appeal of HIGHWAY & LOCAL MOTOR FREIGHT DRIVERS, DOCKMEN AND HELPERS, LOCAL UNION 707, et al.

Nos. 1348, 1462, 1463, 1464, 1465, 1466, 1467, 1468, 1469,

1470, 1471, 1472, 1473, 1474, 1475, 1476, 1480, 1481, 1565,

1569, 1570, 1571, 1572, 1573, 1578, 1590, 1591, 1592, 1593,

1594, 1602, 1603, 1604, 1605, 1606, 1619, 1629, 1630, 1631

and 1802, Dockets 90-6038, 6046, 6048, 6056, 6058, 6060,

6064, 6066, 6068, 6070, 6074, 6076, 6078, 6080, 6082, 6084,

6086, 6088, 6090, 6094, 6096, 6098, 6100, 6102, 6106, 6108,

6110, 6112, 6114, 6116, 6118, 6120, 6122, 6124, 6126, 6128,

6130, 6132, 6134 and 6140.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued June 11, 1990.

Decided June 27, 1990.

James T. Grady, Gen. Counsel, International Broth. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, AFL-CIO, Washington, D.C. (Mudge Rose Guthrie Alexander & Ferdon, New York City, of counsel), for defendant-appellant.

Duane B. Beeson, San Francisco, Cal. (Beeson, Tayer, Silbert, Bodine & Livingston, San Francisco, Cal., Gerry M. Miller, Fred Perillo, Previant, Goldberg, Uelmen, Gratz, Miller & Brueggeman, Milwaukee, Wis., Kenneth K. Fisher, Freddy R. Wiedmann, Fisher & Fisher, Brooklyn, New York City, of counsel), for appellant Affiliates.

John R. Climaco, Cleveland, Ohio (Wendell Shepherd, Roy Barnes, P.C., New York City, Paul S. Lefkowitz, Climaco, Climaco, Seminatore, Lefkowitz & Garofoli Co., L.P.A., Cleveland, Ohio, of counsel), for appellants Beer, Beverage and Wine Industry Salesmen, Workers, Drivers, Helpers and Warehousemen, Funeral and Livery Chauffeurs and Helpers, Funeral Home Employees, Floral and Special Services Drivers, Helpers, Workers and All Auto. Salesmen, Cuyahoga County and Vicinity Ohio, Union Local 293; Truck Drivers Union Local 348; Excavating, Building Material, Construction Drivers, Race Track Employees, Lake, Geauga Counties and Vicinity, Ohio, Local 436; Ice, Coal, Miscellaneous Scrap Metal, Auto Wrecking and Smelting Drivers and Workers, Cuyahoga, Lake and Geauga Counties, Ohio, Local 422; and Union Local 473, Newspapers and Magazine Delivery Drivers, Chauffeurs and Handlers.

Barry Ivan Slotnick, New York City (Robert L. Tucker, Louis H. Benjamin, Slotnick & Baker, New York City, of counsel), for appellants Teamsters Union Locals 813 and 1034.

Eugene S. Friedman, New York City (Jay P. Levy-Warren, Michael Barrett, Bruce S. Levine, Friedman & Levy-Warren, New York City, of counsel), for appellants Building Material Teamsters Local 282 and Highway & Local Motor Freight Drivers, Dockmen & Helpers, Union Local 707.

Caesar C. Guazzo, New York City (Mark C. Rushfield, Delia M. Guazzo, Guazzo, Perelson, Rushfield & Guazzo, New York City, of counsel), for appellants Joint Council 73; Merchandise Drivers Union Local 641; Teamsters Union Local 522; Teamsters Union Local 177; New Jersey Mailers Local 1100; Bakery Drivers and Salesmen, Local 194; Teamsters Union Locals 478, 408, 863, 11, 418, 462; Truck Drivers, Warehousemen, Frozen Foods, Allied Industries of Northern New Jersey, Union Local 617; Milk Drivers and Dairy Employees, Union Local 680; Highway and Local Motor Freight Drivers, Dockmen and Helpers, Union Local 701; Union Local 945, IBT; Teamsters Union Local 125; Beer Drivers, Helpers, Loaders, Unloaders, etc. Local 153; Teamsters Union Local 30; Joint Council 53 and its affiliated local unions; and the Pennsylvania Conference of Teamsters.

Gerard J. Sweeney, Sweeney, Gallo & Reich, Sunnyside, N.Y., of counsel, for appellant Union Local 803.

Franklin K. Moss, Spivack, Lipton, Watanabe & Spivack, New York City, of counsel, for appellants Joint Councils 7, 37, 38, 39, 43 and 65; Union Locals 23, 43, 75, 200, 344, 662, 579, 695, 563, 1081, 15, 70, 78, 85, 94, 137, 150, 216, 226, 228, 278, 287, 291, 296, 302, 315, 350, 386, 431, 432, 439, 484, 490, 517, 533, 550, 507, 576, 588, 601, 616, 624, 665, 679, 746, 748, 849, 853, 857, 860, 890, 912, 542, 57, 58, 81, 162, 206, 223, 281, 305, 324, 962, 24, 40, 52, 92, 100, 105, 114, 400, 407, 428, 450, 571, 637, 654, 661, 908, 957, 964, 1199, 1717, 7, 51, 124, 164, 214, 243, 247, 283, 299, 328, 332, 337, 339, 372, 406, 486, 580, 614, 1038, 1620 and 2040.

Ira A. Sturm, Manning, Raab, Dealy & Sturm, New York City, of counsel, for appellant Union Local 210.

Michael B. Standard, Rabinowitz, Boudin, Standard, Krinsky & Lieberman, New York City, of counsel, for appellant Union Local 840.

D. Gayle Loftis, Chasan, Leyner, Tarrant, Loftis & Lamparello, Jersey City, N.J., of counsel, for appellant Merchandise Drivers Union Local 641.

Gerald Richman, Shapiro, Shiff, Beilly, Rosenberg & Fox, New York City, of counsel, for appellant Union Locals 202 and 812.

Ira Drogin, New York City, of counsel, for appellant Union Local 295.

Harvey S. Mars, Law Offices of Thomas Gleason, New York City, of counsel, for appellants Joint Councils 9 and 55 and Union Locals 28, 33, 61, 67, 71, 86, 246, 391, 509, 639, 730, 922 and 1714.

Carmena B. Schwecke, Iannuzzi and Iannuzzi, New York City, of counsel, for appellant Union Local 27.

David Grossman, Schneider, Cohen, Solomon, Leder & Montalbano, Cranford, N.J., of counsel, for appellant Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers, Union Local 560.

Gerard F. Daley, Grady & Dwyer, Boston, Mass., of counsel, for appellants Joint Council 10 and Union Locals 1, 25, 42, 49, 55, 59, 64, 82, 122, 127, 157, 170, 259, 340, 379, 380, 404, 437, 494, 496, 504, 526, 597, 633, 653, 686, 829 and 841.

Andrew S. Fisher, Sidney L. Meyer, Jane Simkin Smith, Fisher & Fisher, Brooklyn, N.Y., of counsel, for appellant Union Local 810.

Daniel Engelstein, Vladeck, Waldman, Elias & Engelhard, New York City, of counsel, for appellants Union Locals 19, 997, 657, 577, 745, 988, 516, 373, 182, 858, 687 and 72 and Joint Councils 16, 18 and 80.

Patrick J. Calihan, Chicago, Ill., of counsel, for appellant Union Local 727.

Susan Martin, Sipser, Weinstock, Harper & Dorn, New York City, of counsel, for appellants Union Locals 191, 443, 493, 1150, 63, 87, 166, 186, 208, 389, 399, 495, 598, 630, 692, 848, 896, 911, and Joint Council 64.

Edward M. Shaw, Stillman, Friedman & Shaw, New York City, of counsel, for appellants Union Locals 727, 142, 703, 710, 738, 744.

J. Warren Mangan, O'Conner & Mangan, Long Island City, N.Y., of counsel, for appellant Union Local 807.

Richard W. Mark, Asst. U.S. Atty., New York City (Otto G. Obermaier, U.S. Atty., S.D. New York, Edward T. Ferguson, III, Asst. U.S. Atty., New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff-appellee.

Laurence Gold, Walter Kamiat, Washington, D.C., for amicus curiae American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations.

Before MESKILL, WINTER and PRATT, Circuit Judges.

WINTER, Circuit Judge:

These appeals challenge Judge Edelstein's order enjoining all members and affiliates of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters ("IBT") from litigating issues related to a Consent Decree between the IBT and the government in any court other than the Southern District of New York. We affirm the injunction as a valid exercise of the district court's authority under the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1651 (1988), to issue orders "in aid of [its] jurisdiction[ ]." Id. at Sec. 1651(a).

In June 1988, the government filed this civil action in the Southern District against the IBT and its General Executive Board under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1964 (1988). On March 14, 1989, Judge Edelstein entered a Consent Decree embodying a settlement agreement between the parties to the suit. The details of that Consent Decree are described in United States v. International Bhd. of Teamsters, 905 F.2d 610, 612-13 (2d Cir.1990), familiarity with which is assumed.

After the Consent Decree was entered, various members and local affiliates of the IBT began litigation in other district courts challenging the actions of the officers appointed by Judge Edelstein under the Consent Decree. On December 15, 1989, in response to that litigation and the threat of similar actions being brought in other districts, Judge Edelstein issued a temporary restraining order enjoining all members and affiliates of the IBT from "filing or taking any legal action that challenges, impedes, seeks review of or relief from, or seeks to prevent or delay any act of [the court-appointed officers] in any court or forum in any jurisdiction except this Court." United States v. International Bhd. of Teamsters, 726 F.Supp. 943 (S.D.N.Y.1989). On January 17, 1990, Judge Edelstein converted the restraining order into a permanent injunction pursuant to the All Writs Act, see United States v. International Bhd. of Teamsters, 728 F.Supp. 1032 (S.D.N.Y.1990), from which the present appeals were taken. Appellants include the IBT and various local unions, joint councils, and area conferences affiliated with the IBT.

Large portions of the extensive papers filed in this appeal are devoted to the issue of whether local affiliates are "bound" by the Consent Decree. Appellants thus argue that various purported amendments to the IBT Constitution embodied in the Consent Decree and actions taken by the court-appointed officers with regard to affiliates are invalid. These issues are not before us, however. The coercive portion of the January 17 injunction merely channels all litigation by affiliates relating to the Consent Decree into the federal court that has jurisdiction over implementation of the Decree. The injunction does not purport to resolve challenges to the authority of the court-appointed officers or to purported amendments...