Michael Zemonick v. Consolidation Coal Co., a Corp., 796 F.2d 1546 (4th Cir. 1986). · Go Syfert
Search
Michael Zemonick v. Consolidation Coal Co., a Corp., 796 F.2d 1546 (4th Cir. 1986). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
19 citation events across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: G.P. Reed v. United Transportation Union Fred A. Hardin K.R. Moore J.L. McKinney (ca4, 1987-09-17)
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) G.P. Reed v. United Transportation Union Fred A. Hardin K.R. Moore J.L. McKinney
4th Cir. · 1987 · confidence medium
In an en banc decision in Zemonick v. Consolidation Coal Co., 796 F.2d 1546, 1547 (4th Cir.1986), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 671 , 93 L.Ed.2d 723 (1986), we held that Del Costello was to be applied retroactively.
discussed Cited "see" Stephen Juzwin and Mary Juzwin, His Wife v. Asbestos Corporation, Ltd., Individually and as Successor to Johnson's Company Carey Canadian Mines Amtorg Trading Corporation and Metropolitan Life Insurance Company Flintkote Mines, Ltd. Turner & Newall, P.L.C. John Doe Corporation (A Fictitious Name Representing One or More Corporations or Companies, Engaged in the Business of Mining, Manufacturing, Distributing or Supplying Finished and Unfinished Asbestos Products and Fibers to Plaintiffs' Employer Gaf/ruberoid) Judy Doe Corporations (A Fictitious Name Representing One or More Legal Entities Who Stand in the Shoes of the John Doe Either as Successor in Interest, Alter Ego, or by Other Equitable Doctrine Which Makes Them Responsible for the John Doe Liability). Amtorg Trading Corp., Third-Party v. Leonard J. Buck, Inc., Flintkote Mines, Ltd., National Gypsum Company and Turner & Newall, P.L.C., Third-Party and Carey Canada, Inc., and Third-Party v. Lac D'AmiAnte Du Quebec Limitee, Individually and as Successor to Lake Asbestos of Quebec, Ltd. And Bell Asbestos Mines Limited, and Leonard J. Buck, Inc., Third-Party and Fourth-Party v. Associated Ore & Metal Corp., Ltd., Fourth-Party Appeal of Carey Canada, Inc.
3rd Cir. · 1990 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord Zemonick v. Consolidation Coal Co., 762 F.2d 381, 391 (4th Cir.1985) (Ervin, J., dissenting), rev'd on rehearing, 796 F.2d 1546 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1018 , 107 S.Ct. 671 , 93 L.Ed.2d 723 (1986). 39 Turning then to the first factor, we must ask whether our decision overrules clear past precedent on which the parties may have relied or decides an issue of first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed.
discussed Cited "see" Juzwin v. Asbestos Corp.
3rd Cir. · 1990 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord Zemonick v. Consolidation Coal Co., 762 F.2d 381, 391 (4th Cir.1985) (Ervin, J., dissenting), rev’d on rehearing, 796 F.2d 1546 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1018 , 107 S.Ct. 671 , 93 L.Ed.2d 723 (1986).
discussed Cited "see" Dorothy R. Cannon v. The Kroger Co. (2×)
4th Cir. · 1988 · signal: see · confidence high
See Zemonick v. Consolidation Coal Co., 762 F.2d 381 , 397 n. 14 (4th Cir.1985) (Ervin, J., dissenting), rev’d, 796 F.2d 1546 (4th Cir.1986) (en banc) (per curiam) (citing dissenting panel opinion with approval), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 671 , 93 L.Ed.2d 723 (1986).
discussed Cited "see" Edward J. Meadows v. Eaton Corporation United Steelworkers of America
4th Cir. · 1987 · signal: see · confidence high
See Zemonick v. Consolidated Coal Co., 796 F.2d 1546 (4th Cir. 1986) (en banc), rev'g 762 F.2d 381 (4th Cir. 1985). 3 We deny the defendants' request for double costs and attorney's fees pursuant to Fed.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Michael ZEMONICK, Et Al., Appellants,
v.
CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY, a Corporation, Et Al., Appellees
84-1353.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Jul 28, 1986.
796 F.2d 1546
1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 29851
Robert M. Bastress (Barbara J. Fleischauer, West Virginia University College of Law, Morgantown, W. Va., on brief), for appellants., Robert M. Steptoe, Jr. (C. David Morrison, Steptoe & Johnson), Clarksburg, W. Va., for appellee Consolidation Coal Co., (Michael J. Aloi, Manchin, Aloi & Carrick, Fairmont, W. Va., on brief), for appellee Dist. 31, United Mine Workers of America.
Russell, Widener, Hall, Phillips, Murnaghan, Sprouse, Ervin, Chapman, Haynsworth.
Cited by 16 opinions  |  Published
Reporter's Syllabus editorial summary, not part of the Court's opinion

Robert M. Bastress (Barbara J. Fleischauer, West Virginia University College of Law, Morgantown, W. Va., on brief), for appellants.

Robert M. Steptoe, Jr. (C. David Morrison, Steptoe & Johnson), Clarksburg, W. Va., for appellee Consolidation Coal Co.

(Michael J. Aloi, Manchin, Aloi & Carrick, Fairmont, W. Va., on brief), for appellee Dist. 31, United Mine Workers of America.

Before RUSSELL, WIDENER, HALL, PHILLIPS, MURNAGHAN, SPROUSE, ERVIN and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges, and HAYNSWORTH, Senior Circuit Judge.*

PER CURIAM:

Lead Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The district court dismissed these hybrid § 301/DFR claims as barred by the six months limitation period established by the Supreme Court of the United States in DelCostello v. Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151, 103 S.Ct. 2281, 76 L.Ed.2d 476 (1983). The plaintiffs appealed to this court, and the majority of the three judge panel hearing the appeal reversed the district court, holding that DelCostello should not have been given retroactive effect in this case, and remanding the case to the district court for further proceedings. Zemonick v. Consolidation Coal Co., 762 F.2d 381 (4th Cir.1985). One member of the panel dissented, expressing the views (1) that the Supreme Court in DelCostello had already resolved the issue of retroactivity against the plaintiffs and (2) that even if it is appropriate to conduct an independent analysis of retroactivity under Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson, 404 U.S. 97, 92 S.Ct. 349, 30 L.Ed.2d 296 (1971), the Chevron factors require that DelCostello be given retroactive rather than prospective application to these facts.

[*1547] A majority of the active judges of this court subsequently voted to give en banc consideration to the issues raised by this appeal. Following briefing and oral argument, it was held that the district court did not err when it applied DelCostello retroactively in this case and that the decision of the court should be affirmed. Since the rationale for the en banc court’s decision is adequately reflected in the dissenting opinion in Zemonick v. Consolidation Coal Co., 762 F.2d 381, 389-397 (4th Cir.1985), no useful purpose would be served by repeating it here.

AFFIRMED.

Dissent

HAYNSWORTH, Senior Circuit Judge, with whom Judge DONALD RUSSELL and Judge K.K. HALL

join, dissenting:

I dissent for the reasons set forth in the majority panel opinion in Zemonick v. Consolidation Coal Co., 762 F.2d 381, 382-89 (4th Cir.1985).