Case ID: kan_182/html/0205-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Schroeder, J.:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 40,486
    Richard Newell, d/b/a El Dorado Dairy, Appellee, v. Chauffeurs, Teamsters & Helpers Local Union 795; S. E. Smith and the agents, servants, employees and attorneys of any of said defendants, Appellants.
    
    (319 P. 2d 171)
    Opinion denying a rehearing filed December 18, 1957.
    (For original opinion affirming as modified see 181 Kan. 898, 317 P. 2d 817.)
    
      Russell Cranmer, Payne H. Ratner, Louise Mattox, Payne H. Ratner, Jr., Dale B. Stinson, Jr., Cliff W. Ratner, William L. Fry, A. Wayne Murphy, Bernard V. Borst, D. Clifford Allison, and Gerald D. Lasswell, all of Wichita, for the appellants.
    
      M. F. Litras, R. C. Woodward and H. Pauline Woodward, all of El Dorado, for the appellee.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Schroeder, J.:

Counsel for appellants filed a motion for rehearing, which consists largely of reargument of the points previously argued and considered by the court. It presents nothing which warrants a reconsideration of the case, and the motion is denied.

Counsel state, “This court’s conclusion that appellants brought about a secondary boycott does not support paragraph C of the court’s injunction wherein appellants are enjoined, not only from a secondary boycott, but also from primary boycott.”

One of the issues upon which the opinion of this case was written concerned a secondary boycott denounced by G. S. 1955 Supp., 44-809a(l). Primary boycott was not an issue in this case and paragraph C of the injunction is not to be construed as having any application to primary boycott, but rather to secondary boycott only.