Home

Alphabetic Chronological Legal Area Product

Full Text/Search

Key Statutes Glossary Links AntiTrust.Org

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Syllabus

UNITED STATES v. HUTCHESON ET AL.

312 U.S. 219

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

Appeal under the Criminal Appeals Act from a judgment quashing an indictment under the Sherman Act

No. 43. Argued December 19, 1940 Decided February 3, 1941

1. In determining whether trade union conduct violates the Sherman Act, that Act should be read with 20 of the Clayton Act and with the Norris-LaGuardia Act. P. 231.

2. Labor union activities enumerated in 20 of the Clayton Act, which that section declares shall not be "considered or held to be violations of any law of the United States," are not punishable as criminal under the Sherman Act. P. 232.

3. Section 20 of the Clayton Act does not differentiate between trade union conduct directed against an employer because of a controversy arising in the relation between employer and employee, as such, and conduct similarly directed but arising from a struggle between two unions seeking the favor of the same employer. P. 232.

4. In a case involving interstate commerce, union carpenters refused to work for a brewing company by which they were employed, or on construction work being done for it and for its adjoining tenant; they attempted to persuade members of other unions similarly to refuse to work; they picketed the brewer's premises, displaying signs "Unfair to Organized Labor"; and they recommended to the union members and their friends not to buy or use the brewer's product.

 Held:

(1) That these actions were protected from prosecution under the Sherman Act by 20 of the Clayton Act, construed in the light of Congress's definition of a "labor dispute" in the Norris-LaGuardia Act. P. 233.

(2) In view of the broad definition of "labor dispute" in the Norris-LaGuardia Act, 20 of the Clayton Act gives protection to the conduct it describes although directed in part against outsiders to the labor dispute. Duplex Printing Press Co. v. Deering, 254 U.S. 443, is inapplicable. P. 234.

32 F.Supp. 600, affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion of the Court.


All graphics and HTML are copyright Anthony D. Becker 1994-2004.

Disclaimer