UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AM., AFL-CIO v. MESKER BROS. IND., INC., 70 C 655(4).

• Decision Date: 14 April 1971
• Docket Number: No. 70 C 655(4).,70 C 655(4).
• Citation: 327 F. Supp. 578
• Parties: UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, a voluntary unincorporated labor organization and Charles H. Blackard, Plaintiffs, v. MESKER BROTHERS INDUSTRIES, INC., a corporation, and Aetna Life Insurance Company, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri

327 F. Supp. 578

UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, a voluntary unincorporated labor organization and Charles H. Blackard, Plaintiffs, v. MESKER BROTHERS INDUSTRIES, INC., a corporation, and Aetna Life Insurance Company, Defendants.

No. 70 C 655(4).

United States District Court, E. D. Missouri, E. D.

April 14, 1971.

Levin & Weinhaus, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiffs.

Heege & Heege, Clayton, Mo., for defendants.

MEMORANDUM

WANGELIN, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on defendants' separate motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter. Counsel for the parties appeared and were heard on the motions. Briefs in support and in opposition have been submitted.

Plaintiffs are United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO, (hereinafter referred to as "Union") the collective bargaining representative of all the production and maintenance employees employed by Mesker Brothers Industries, Inc.; and Charles H. Blackard, an employee of Mesker Brothers Industries, Inc. and a member of plaintiff Union. Defendants are Mesker Brothers Industries, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Mesker"); and Aetna Life Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to as "Aetna").

Jurisdiction is asserted under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, 29 U.S.C. § 185.

For the purposes of the pending motion there is no dispute as to the facts. The complaint alleges the following: On October 4, 1968, plaintiff Blackard sustained a severe injury to his hand while working. Representatives of Mesker advised Blackard that amputation at the wrist was called for and that Mesker would pay for the amputation. Blackard refused to have the hand amputated.

At the time of the injury, there was in effect a collective bargaining agreement between Mesker and the plaintiff Union which provided that Mesker would maintain an insurance policy written by a reliable insurance company providing the coverage listed in an attached Schedule of Benefits. Article IX of the collective bargaining agreement expressly stated:

"It is understood that the Company will not operate this insurance benefit plan and that the Company's liability will be limited to obtaining and paying the premiums on the insurance policy, and that the insurance company will provide the benefits and administer the same. These benefits will be subject to such conditions and limitations as standard practice in the insurance business prescribes * * *."

The attached Schedule of Benefits provided for benefits of...