U.S. Code » Title 29 » Chapter CHAPTER 11— LABOR-MANAGEMENT REPORTING AND DISCLOSURE PROCEDURE › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER VII— MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

29 U.S.C. § 530

Deprivation of rights by violence; penalty

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 29 CasesGoogle Scholar

It shall be unlawful for any person through the use of force or violence, or threat of the use of force or violence, to restrain, coerce, or intimidate, or attempt to restrain, coerce, or intimidate any member of a labor organization for the purpose of interfering with or preventing the exercise of any right to which he is entitled under the provisions of this chapter. Any person who willfully violates this section shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1961–2022 · leading case: Breininger v. Sheet Metal Workers Int'l Ass'n Local Union No. 6, 493 U.S. 67 (1989).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Breininger v. Sheet Metal Workers Int'l Ass'n Local Union No. 6, 493 U.S. 67 (1989). · cites it 2× “1555 as passed became LMRDA § 610, 29 U. S. C. § 530 (1982 ed.), which criminalizes the threat or use of force or violence to restrain, coerce, or intimidate any member of a labor organization for the purpose of interfering with or preventing the exercise of rights granted under…”
Jeanne HARRINGTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VANDALIA-BUTLER Bd. OF Educ. Et Al., Defendants-Appellees, 649 F.2d 434 (6th Cir. 1981). · cites it 2× “Briefly, in that case we held that the acquittal of a charge under 29 U.S.C. § 530 5 could not trigger collateral estoppel of proceedings brought under that statute’s civil counterpart, 29 U.”
United States v. Fred D. Kelley & Paul P. Menz, 545 F.2d 619 (8th Cir. 1976). · cites it 3× “te, and attempt to restrain, coerce and intimidate members of a labor organization, for the purpose of interfering with and preventing the exercise of rights to which they are entitled under the provisions of Sections 411(a)(1) and 411(a)(2), Title 29, United States Code, in…”
Westwood Chem. Co., Inc. v. Richard W. Kulick, Arthur Fletcher, & Lenape Chemicals, Inc., Garry B. Curtiss & Joseph Drasner, Movants-Appellees, 656 F.2d 1224 (6th Cir. 1981). “1980), wherein this Court determined that the acquittal of a charge under 29 U.S.C. § 530 of deprivation of rights by violence, could not trigger collateral estoppel of proceedings brought under that statutes civil counterpart, 29 U.”
Rodriguez v. Serv. Employees Int'l, 755 F. Supp. 2d 1033 (N.D. Cal. 2010). · cites it 4× “, and 29 U.S.C. § 530 , which makes it unlawful for any person, through force or threat of force, to “intimidate any member of a labor organization for the purpose of interfering with or preventing the exercise of any right to which *1039 he is entitled under the provisions of’…”
John C. Shimman, Cross-Appellant v. John Frank, Cross-Appellees, 625 F.2d 80 (6th Cir. 1980). “John Frank, Terry Grothaus and James Grothaus were charged with violating John Shimman’s rights under 29 U.S.C. § 530 , 12 the criminal *89 counterpart to 29 U.”
United Union of Roofers, Waterproofers & Allied Workers, Union No. 33 v. Edwin Meese, Attorney Gen. of the United States of Am., 823 F.2d 652 (1st Cir. 1987). · cites it 2× “29 U.S.C. § 530 (1982); see United States v.”
United States v. Doyle Williams, 624 F.2d 75 (9th Cir. 1980). · cites it 2× “Williams was indicted by a grand jury for conspiracy to violate 29 U.S.C. § 530 , 1 in violation of 18 *76 U.”
United States v. Joseph Giacalone & One 1975 Mercury Four-Door Auto., Maroon in Color, Bearing License Plate No. Tms 416, 541 F.2d 508 (6th Cir. 1976). “None of the elements of the crime stated in 29 U.S.C. § 530 is conclusively established by this affidavit; however, we need only to look for facts supporting probabilities, for, as stated in Brinegar, 338 U.”
Schonfeld v. Raftery, 335 F. Supp. 846 (S.D.N.Y. 1971). · cites it 3× “c) Criminal Enforcement Although jurisdiction exists as to the elements described immediately above, it does not exist as to that portion of the complaint which alleges violations of § 610 of the LMRDA, 29 U.S. C.A. § 530, 2 making it unlawful for any person by force or violence…”
United States v. Local 560, 550 F. Supp. 511 (D.N.J. 1982). · cites it 3× “See 29 U.S.C. § 530 . 12 The government argues that section 610 of the LMRDA is not the exclusive remedy for extortionate taking of section 411 rights.”
United States v. Bellomo, 263 F. Supp. 2d 561 (E.D.N.Y 2003). “The defendants argue persuasively, among other things, that 29 U.S.C. § 530 specifically provides that the conduct alleged in part (b) of RA One and Count Three is a crime, a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than $1000 or imprisonment for one year or both.”
Show all 28 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.