Union violation (Alabama) · Go Syfert
← Alabama issues

Union violation in Alabama

8 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1943–2011 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Alabama courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
McKelvey v. Creeveygreen
· 1900 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
2 sentences

2011First Union also cites McKelvey v. Creevey, 72 Conn. 464, 466-67 , 45 A. 4, 5 (1900) (mortgagee is owner of land, and as between mortgagor and mortgagee, the mortgagee is regarded as having legal title to the land).

2011First Union also cites McKelvey v. Creevey, 72 Conn. 464, 466-67 , 45 A. 4, 5 (1900) (mortgagee is owner of land, and as between mortgagor and mortgagee, the mortgagee is regarded as having legal title to the land).

11
KGS Steel, Inc. v. McInishgreen
ala · 2008 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
1 sentence

2010The trial court was presented with conflicting evidence regarding whether Harris in fact had a workplace accident on July 6. “[T]he trial court is in the best position to weigh conflicting evidence and to judge the credibility of witnesses.... ” Ex parte McInish, 47 So.3d 767, 773 (Ala. 2008).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (11)

CaseCitedYears
Ex Parte Trinity Industries, Inc. green
ala · 1996
1 sentence

2010On that form, Harris asserted that his claim was not “based on an accident” but instead was based on “repetitive motion [and] lifting for several years.” For purposes of his workers’ compensation claim, Harris’s allegation that he suddenly injured his back while lifting up and pulling the drain on the macerator machine, if believed by the fact-finder, would indicate that Harris had an “accident.” See § 25-5-1(7), Ala.Code 1975 (defining an “accident” as “an unexpected or unforeseen event, happening suddenly and violently... .”); Ex parte Trinity Indus., Inc., 680 So.2d at 266 n. 3 (stating tha

12010–2010
Wilson v. FIRST UNION NAT. BANK OF GEORGIA green
alacivapp · 1998
1 sentence

2002Thus, the trial court's consideration of this form did not require conversion of the motion into one for a summary judgment." Wilson v. First Union Nat'l Bank of Georgia , 716 So.2d 722 , 726 (Ala.Civ.App. 1998).

12002–2002
Moore v. ClaimSouth, Inc. green
ala · 1993
2 sentences

1995As in Moore v. ClaimSouth, Inc., 628 So.2d 500 (Ala.1993), Union's summary judgment motion did not contain a narrative summary.

1995As in Moore v. ClaimSouth, Inc. , 628 So.2d 500 (Ala. 1993), Union's summary judgment motion did not contain a narrative summary.

11995–1995
Leonard v. Roebuck neutral
ala · 1907
2 sentences

1983Co. v. Johnston , 205 Ala. 1 , 87 So. 866 (1920); Adams Hardware Co. v. Wimbish , 201 Ala. 548 , 78 So. 902 (1918); Gillespie v. Hester , 160 Ala. 444 , 49 So. 580 (1909); Leonard v. Roebuck , 152 Ala. 312 , 44 So. 390 (1907). *Page 1221 The Willcutts have sufficiently stated a cause of action for rescission and supported it in Mr. Willcutt's affidavit and answers to interrogatories to withstand Union's motion for summary judgment.

1983Co. v. Johnston , 205 Ala. 1 , 87 So. 866 (1920); Adams Hardware Co. v. Wimbish , 201 Ala. 548 , 78 So. 902 (1918); Gillespie v. Hester , 160 Ala. 444 , 49 So. 580 (1909); Leonard v. Roebuck , 152 Ala. 312 , 44 So. 390 (1907). *Page 1221 The Willcutts have sufficiently stated a cause of action for rescission and supported it in Mr. Willcutt's affidavit and answers to interrogatories to withstand Union's motion for summary judgment.

11983–1983
Gillespie v. Hester neutral
ala · 1909
2 sentences

1983Co. v. Johnston , 205 Ala. 1 , 87 So. 866 (1920); Adams Hardware Co. v. Wimbish , 201 Ala. 548 , 78 So. 902 (1918); Gillespie v. Hester , 160 Ala. 444 , 49 So. 580 (1909); Leonard v. Roebuck , 152 Ala. 312 , 44 So. 390 (1907). *Page 1221 The Willcutts have sufficiently stated a cause of action for rescission and supported it in Mr. Willcutt's affidavit and answers to interrogatories to withstand Union's motion for summary judgment.

1983Co. v. Johnston , 205 Ala. 1 , 87 So. 866 (1920); Adams Hardware Co. v. Wimbish , 201 Ala. 548 , 78 So. 902 (1918); Gillespie v. Hester , 160 Ala. 444 , 49 So. 580 (1909); Leonard v. Roebuck , 152 Ala. 312 , 44 So. 390 (1907). *Page 1221 The Willcutts have sufficiently stated a cause of action for rescission and supported it in Mr. Willcutt's affidavit and answers to interrogatories to withstand Union's motion for summary judgment.

11983–1983
Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Johnston green
ala · 1920
2 sentences

1983Co. v. Johnston , 205 Ala. 1 , 87 So. 866 (1920); Adams Hardware Co. v. Wimbish , 201 Ala. 548 , 78 So. 902 (1918); Gillespie v. Hester , 160 Ala. 444 , 49 So. 580 (1909); Leonard v. Roebuck , 152 Ala. 312 , 44 So. 390 (1907). *Page 1221 The Willcutts have sufficiently stated a cause of action for rescission and supported it in Mr. Willcutt's affidavit and answers to interrogatories to withstand Union's motion for summary judgment.

1983Co. v. Johnston , 205 Ala. 1 , 87 So. 866 (1920); Adams Hardware Co. v. Wimbish , 201 Ala. 548 , 78 So. 902 (1918); Gillespie v. Hester , 160 Ala. 444 , 49 So. 580 (1909); Leonard v. Roebuck , 152 Ala. 312 , 44 So. 390 (1907). *Page 1221 The Willcutts have sufficiently stated a cause of action for rescission and supported it in Mr. Willcutt's affidavit and answers to interrogatories to withstand Union's motion for summary judgment.

11983–1983
Adams Hardware Co. v. Wimbish neutral
ala · 1918
2 sentences

1983Co. v. Johnston , 205 Ala. 1 , 87 So. 866 (1920); Adams Hardware Co. v. Wimbish , 201 Ala. 548 , 78 So. 902 (1918); Gillespie v. Hester , 160 Ala. 444 , 49 So. 580 (1909); Leonard v. Roebuck , 152 Ala. 312 , 44 So. 390 (1907). *Page 1221 The Willcutts have sufficiently stated a cause of action for rescission and supported it in Mr. Willcutt's affidavit and answers to interrogatories to withstand Union's motion for summary judgment.

1983Co. v. Johnston , 205 Ala. 1 , 87 So. 866 (1920); Adams Hardware Co. v. Wimbish , 201 Ala. 548 , 78 So. 902 (1918); Gillespie v. Hester , 160 Ala. 444 , 49 So. 580 (1909); Leonard v. Roebuck , 152 Ala. 312 , 44 So. 390 (1907). *Page 1221 The Willcutts have sufficiently stated a cause of action for rescission and supported it in Mr. Willcutt's affidavit and answers to interrogatories to withstand Union's motion for summary judgment.

11983–1983
Burleson Unemployment Compensation Case green
pasuperct · 1953
2 sentences

1976In this regard, it is germane to note that the Pennsylvania courts were faced with a similar situation in Burleson v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review , 173 Pa. Super. 527 , 98 A.2d 762 .

1976In this regard, it is germane to note that the Pennsylvania courts were faced with a similar situation in Burleson v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review , 173 Pa. Super. 527 , 98 A.2d 762 .

11976–1976
Bakery & Pastry Drivers & Helpers Local 802 of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Wohl green
scotus · 1942
2 sentences

1953Building Service, etc., Union v. Gazzam, supra. The cases of Cafeteria Employees Union v. Angelos, 320 U.S. 293 , *Page 505 64 S.Ct. 126 , 88 L.Ed. 58 , and Bakery and Pastry Drivers and Helpers Local 802 of International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Wohl 315 U.S. 769 , 62 S.Ct. 816 , 86 L.Ed. 1178 relied on by appellees, were decided without the influence of an act such as the Taft-Hartley Act which prohibits coercion to force employees in the matter of deciding whether they will join a union or select a bargaining representative.

1953Building Service, etc., Union v. Gazzam, supra. The cases of Cafeteria Employees Union v. Angelos, 320 U.S. 293 , *Page 505 64 S.Ct. 126 , 88 L.Ed. 58 , and Bakery and Pastry Drivers and Helpers Local 802 of International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Wohl 315 U.S. 769 , 62 S.Ct. 816 , 86 L.Ed. 1178 relied on by appellees, were decided without the influence of an act such as the Taft-Hartley Act which prohibits coercion to force employees in the matter of deciding whether they will join a union or select a bargaining representative.

11953–1953
Cafeteria Employees Union, Local 302 v. Angelos green
scotus · 1943
2 sentences

1953Building Service, etc., Union v. Gazzam, supra. The cases of Cafeteria Employees Union v. Angelos, 320 U.S. 293 , *Page 505 64 S.Ct. 126 , 88 L.Ed. 58 , and Bakery and Pastry Drivers and Helpers Local 802 of International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Wohl 315 U.S. 769 , 62 S.Ct. 816 , 86 L.Ed. 1178 relied on by appellees, were decided without the influence of an act such as the Taft-Hartley Act which prohibits coercion to force employees in the matter of deciding whether they will join a union or select a bargaining representative.

1953Building Service, etc., Union v. Gazzam, supra. The cases of Cafeteria Employees Union v. Angelos, 320 U.S. 293 , *Page 505 64 S.Ct. 126 , 88 L.Ed. 58 , and Bakery and Pastry Drivers and Helpers Local 802 of International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Wohl 315 U.S. 769 , 62 S.Ct. 816 , 86 L.Ed. 1178 relied on by appellees, were decided without the influence of an act such as the Taft-Hartley Act which prohibits coercion to force employees in the matter of deciding whether they will join a union or select a bargaining representative.

11953–1953
Marsh v. Elba Bank & Trust Co. neutral
· 1920
2 sentences

1943Marsh v. Elba Bank & Trust Co., 205 Ala. 425 , 88 So. 423 ; Sovereign Camp, W.

1943Marsh v. Elba Bank & Trust Co., 205 Ala. 425 , 88 So. 423 ; Sovereign Camp, W.

11943–1943

Where else courts name it

IL 42 (1903–2025) CA 30 (1919–2025) PA 21 (1868–2026) TX 14 (1879–2015) NY 13 (1891–2014) FL 11 (1959–2003) WA 10 (1954–2024) AL 8 (1943–2011) MO 7 (1984–2007) CT 7 (1930–2015) MS 5 (1956–1999) IN 5 (1973–2026) NJ 5 (1956–2004) WV 4 (1899–1974) LA 4 (1984–2011) MI 4 (1962–2016) WI 4 (1979–2008) KY 4 (1908–1989) RI 4 (1990–2007) MA 3 (1995–2017) OH 3 (2006–2022) OK 3 (1935–1996) DC 3 (1979–2010) ME 3 (1914–2000) GA 3 (1995–1998) MD 2 (2005–2006) HI 2 (1981–2000) NE 2 (1998–1999) NV 2 (1966–1966) DE 2 (1947–1971) AR 2 (1991–2016)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check