Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca11-14-13779/USCOURTS-ca11-14-13779-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 720
Nature of Suit: Labor Management Relations Act
Cause of Action: 

---

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 14-13779

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 2:13-cv-00580-WKW-SRW

ALABAMA GAS CORPORATION,

Plaintiff -

Counter Defendant -

Appellant -

Cross Appellee,

versus

GAS FITTERS LOCAL UNION NO. 548 OF

THE UNITED ASSOCIATION, AFL-CIO-CLC,

Defendant -

Counter Claimant -

Appellee -

Cross Appellant.

USCA11 Case: 14-13779 Date Filed: 04/10/2015 Page: 1 of 3
2

______________________

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Alabama

________________________

(April 10, 2015)

Before JORDAN, JILL PRYOR and DUBINA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

In its appeal, Alabama Gas Corporation (Algasco) challenges the district 

court’s decision to exclude the expert testimony that it submitted in support of its 

motion for summary judgment as well as the district court’s grant of summary 

judgment to Gas Fitters Local Union No. 548 of the United Association, 

AFL-CIO-CLC (Local 548) confirming an arbitration award. Local 548 crossappeals the district court’s denial of the union’s request for attorney’s fees and 

expenses, which it sought as a sanction against Algasco for pursuing this litigation 

challenging the arbitration award.

“We review confirmations of arbitration awards and denials of motions to 

vacate arbitration awards under the same standard, reviewing the district court’s 

findings of fact for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo.” Frazier v. 

CitiFinancial Corp., 604 F.3d 1313, 1321 (11th Cir. 2010). We review the district 

court’s exclusion of Algasco’s expert testimony for abuse of discretion and will 

reverse the court’s ruling only where it was manifestly erroneous. Hughes v. Kia 

Motors Corp., 766 F.3d 1317, 1328 (11th Cir. 2014). We review the denial of 

USCA11 Case: 14-13779 Date Filed: 04/10/2015 Page: 2 of 3
3

Local 548’s request for attorney’s fees for abuse of discretion. Dionne v. 

Floormasters Enters., Inc., 667 F.3d 1199, 1203 (11th Cir. 2012).

After reviewing the record and reading the parties’ briefs, we affirm the 

exclusion of Algasco’s expert testimony, the summary judgment entered in favor 

of Local 548, and the denial of Local 548’s request for attorney’s fees based on the 

district court’s well-reasoned opinion filed on July 23, 2014.

AFFIRMED.

USCA11 Case: 14-13779 Date Filed: 04/10/2015 Page: 3 of 3