Legal Document

330 U.S. 395 67 Supreme Court Reporter 775 91 L.Ed. 973 UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS AMERICAv.UNITED STATES. BAY COUNTIES DIST. COUNCIL CARPENTERSAND AMERICA et al. versus SAME. LUMBER PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION, Inc., ALAMEDA COUNTY BUILDING CONSTRUCTION TRADES BOORMAN CO. Nos. 6 to 10. Reargued & Submitted Oct. 15, 1946. Decided March 10, 1947. Under provision of Norris-LaGuardia Act making liability organization interested in labor dispute for unlawful acts individual officers, members, or agents dependent upon clear proof authorization such act, requirement 'authorization' restricts liability, although officers members are acting within scope their general authourity, those organizations who actually participate the acts, except that particular act charged, generally type and quality, had been expressly authorized, necessarily followed from a granted authority. Act, § 6, 29 United States Code Annotated KF65 U5 106. [Syllabus pages 395-397 intentionally omitted] Mr. Charles Haw. Hawai‘i Reports KFH45 A2 Tuttle, New York City, petitioners Brotherhood Carpenters, etc., 7. Messrs. Joseph O. Carson II, Indianapolis, Ind., Harry N. Routzohn, Dayton, Ohio, Hugh K. McKevitt Jack M. Howard, both San Francisco, Cal., petitioner Bay County District Council Carpenters Number Maurice E. Harrison, 8. Guy C. Calden Clarence Todd, 9. Morgan Judge Doyle, Holmes Baldridge, Washington, D.C., respondent. Justice REED delivered opinion Court. 1 These criminal cases which conviction various defendants has obtained Unit d Northern California, Southern Division, affirmed by Circuit Appeals Ninth Circuit, 144 Federal Reporter, 2nd Series 546. They were charged with conspiracy violate Sherman 1.1 The parties alleged two groups: on one hand, local manufacturers dealers commodities affected incorporated trade associations officials thereof; and, other, unincorporated unions business agents. indictment below unlawfully combined conspired together, successfully, monopolize unduly part interstate commerce millwork patterned lumber. purpose effect was be restrain out-of-state shipping selling these Francisco area California prevent freely handling them. It also sought raise prices products affected. To achieve purpose, contract entered into between wage scale working articles involved, restrictive clause, '* * no material will purchased from, work done any article operation performed same Saw Mills, Mills Cabinet Shops, distributors do not conform rates conditions this agreement,' specified exceptions here material. This it is alleged, enforced mutual advantage conspirators some through conference picketing acquiescence arrangement. By means conspiracy, union workmen better wages, employers higher profits against whom directed largely prevented sharing Area business, all price disadvantage consumer unreasonable restraint commerce. legal theory conspiracies employees Act. 2 Five petitions certiorari presented different either singly jointly others. sufficient purposes review say they raised question application employer group, trial an indictment.2 On account importance federal questions asserted conflicts circuits, writs granted.3 3 Since taken important groups decided us. We held violated Allen Bradley company Local Union 3, 325 797, 65 1533, 89 1939. holding causes us approve ruling appellate courts first but left unresolved as point decision directed. 4 charges forbidden issue, power court limited Note 2, supra. limitations section matters growing out disputes, covered while may come before properly conceded agreement grew defendant participated dispute. See 13, 47 Statutes-at-Large 73, 113. Section appeared draft bill Senate Committee Judiciary thereof. At time its form precisely at present. drawn comprehensive substitute S. 1482 70th Congress, providing only limitation jurisdiction equity issuance injunctions. In 71st similarly subject, 2497, reintroduced like proposed. Neither reported Committee.4 bills quite similar substance, therefore effectiveness, same. 5 next, 72d bill, H.R. 5315, become introduced. succinctly states public policy designed further—a definition authority disputes.5 That accord behind earlier drafts referred above.6 As new practically identical long considered committee substitutes, hearings 5315 short.7 But even so, attack conti ued restriction law agency disputes.8 reply House did 'not affect agency' necessary 'under circumstances' so 'the should know Congress expects them hold liable member without actual participation in, of, officer association.'9 view 'rule evidence,' 'new agency.' 'There made relieving responsibility his person shall responsible 'unlawful act' 'clear proof' ratification. Thus rule evidence, substantive law, established.'10 7 need determine whether called evidence changes agency. relieve organizations, capital,11 damages imputation guilt lawless disputes member, offense, participated, gave prior authorization, ratified after knowledge perpetration.12 8 co-conspirator matter moment advocates bill.13 Before enactment when prohibited under established, widely publicized case overt co-conspirators.14 resulted approved offenses law. While course participants immunized authorized furtherance now protected unauthorized illegal other conspiracy. 9 legislative history makes intended meaning word 'authorization,' we think, almost equally clear. agent authority, based Danbury Hatters Case, urged argument language 6.15 When dealt contention. 10 'But man legally due employment. evidently doctrine civil negligence. If rests basis implied participation. He conspiring setting motion forces result, resulting, act. 11 high that, action, required uphold established personal men can associates because ratification acts. required, imputed proven beyond reasonable doubt order impose liability.'16 12 hold, therefore, used something corporate employment.17 employee associations, association non-participating subsequently association, occurrence. 13 prosecution Joiners convicted requested instruction instructions embodied above interpretation 6.18 A request 58. refused instead given stated concept evidenced excerpts marginal note.19 14 So far Unions, national, concerned, necessity our construction apparent. party agreements. took more definite than Brotherhood. instances name signed contained clause. Necessarily enter analysis relied show different. No how strong association's organization's there must charge jury correctly agents.20 For judge direct verdict guilty conclusive evidence.21 There way knowing jury's facts condemned instructions, note 19 above, 18.22 failure harmless, since might have incorrect instruction. opinion, instructed 6. error aggravated give correct request. 15 suggestion alert powerful corporations gain greatest degree immuniy Tha case. draws distinction large small, national unions, weak members. And draw distinctions. 16 implication what said circumstances explicit controversy antecedent approval do. Certainly cannot escape standing orders disavowing make agreements violation disclaiming Facile arrangements create immunity groups. each. grant negotiate regarding hours, well liable. An illustrative nonrestrictive example where execution. custom traditional practice source bind union. 17 Our this: standards determined. entitled accordance prescribed. repeat, determined jury, court. problem materially accused crime nigh fails could harmless error.23 18 suggested 'conscious participation' given, found think instruct others affects individuals associations. covers alike. Individuals, merely association. Nor participate, authorize ratify. Although trial, weighed explaining permits associatians liability. conscious leaves free weigh individual's light unratified he associated whose participated. activities minor entire scheme, delimitation responsib lity important. Certiorari groups, each containing corporate. Both combatted demurrer ground maintenance proper conditions, state overruled requires conclusion. Thereafter pleas nolo contendere 20 Each petitioners, if stood indicated hereinbefore, would group received. though excepted to, precluded entertaining objection.24 erroneous vital phase substantial rights defendants. notice 'plain error' assigned specified.25 plea contendere, does justice require opportunity stand trail situation created subsequent rulings case? does. 21 present furnishes guide disputes. Ordinarily open sufficiency indictment.26 However, then existing uncertainty contracts restrained Norris-LaGuardia, conclude exceptional also, defense indictment.27 22 judgments reversed remanded 23 JACKSON consideration 24 FRANKFURTER, CHIEF JUSTICE BURTON concur dissenting. 25 issue simple. this. arrangement behalf organization, corporation union, regular find Law? susceptible answer. nor answer obscured. Either subject respects imposes agents, freed lower apply laid down owe clarity pronouncement. very juries, themselves suits, told principles Law, perhaps 'can' apply. What decide ought brought twilight ambiguity. advance administration impart doubts old statute. Law old. embodies, often indicated, policy. 26 forbade 'corporations associations' less engage combinations trade. settled 'associations' Law. Mine Workers America Coronado Coal Co., 259 344, 42 570, 66 975, 27 American 762. since, repeated efforts take Regardless political complexion consistently failed. Equally futile read judicial construction. undeviatingly interdict Law', later enactments withdrawn' specifically enumerated practices unions' Clayton 38 730, 738, KF62 52, 52; Hutcheson, 312 219, 230, 61 463, 465, 85 788, Apex Hosiery Leader, 310 469, 487, 488, 60 982, 988, 989, 84 1311, 128 1044. strange indeed hitherto unsuspected indirection, had, sterilized particularly alone serious extent unreasonably conclusion reached disregarding addressed, wrenching context read.1 considerations move world unreality. unmindful function—their international inevitable influence office affiliated locals. short, anatomy physiology life. especia ly strategic positions restraints commerce, especially rendered immune gives most readily b insulated leading action concerns every aspect deemed binding 28 catch up reality aggregated entity, entity acquires exerting power. individuals. Its exerted, accrues, conduct entrusted purposes. conclusion, supported alike morality reason, early escaped empty subtleties seem fanciful modern reader. Arguments unlike underlie reading whereby sterilized, certainly concerned. Court's sure, words chief undertaken duty union's formulated Court, met unrealizable, big small international. Escape easily contrived. difficult culpability unless convention membership, years four, knowingly carte blanche approving whatever do, significance. instance, president hours wages agreement, turn run counter promote economic betterment membership aim job president. illustrates pursues objectives. Locals until General Office offered approval; President himself active negotiations; representative made; forthcoming routine approval—collective ordinarily quadrennial Brotherhood; circular issued adherence local. Surely 'participation' outlawed combination, normal exerts 'participates' guilty. 30 finds giving discharge quoting statute relevant trial. abstract correctness, differently, judge's accurate ample. wise emphasize counsel care use statutory formula upsetting convictions. upsets convictions deems taken, hereafter, charge, control findings elucidation practical purposes, immunizes offenders perform such, endowed likely exist, holds 31 repeatedly warned satisfied doubt. innocence manner corporations. 'The assumed performing duties delegated him, corporation.' statement expresses standard statutes. violations reads exception whole Presumably conscientiously intendment juries rules cases—there officers. 'more' workings reinforced safeguards naturally decision. 32 Aside actualities practice, terms repel result once 'we minds notion statutes construed artificial rule'. Supply 215 50, 55, 16, 54 87. assure collaborating employers' disregard read. decisions litigation involving industrial controversies. abuse misapplication lodged wield undue extension conspirator chargeable all, occasion isolated individuals, believed provocateurs spurious during strike. aimed curb abusive principle mean change collective responsibility. talking about 'actual authorization,' meant persons really wielding 33 Congressional then, clear.2 All eliminate extraneous crept ct committed relation virtue position did. look sharply affairs confound clothed ordinary operation, doing warp woof true bodies uprooted emphasizes distortions. 1932 too late day known not, explicitly inadvertence remove who, limits organizations. lightly thus back clock hundred practicalities organizatons. 34 debilitating implications enforcement placed bearing activities. lay another unions. contrary, subjected measure 13(b) Act.3 flow ac pursuit 'interested dispute' customary Violations pursuing interest usually formal vote Board Directors stockholders annual meeting assembled. 35 teaching hardly fail. indulgent rest lack affirmative authorization. assurance doubly sure will, doubtless good conscience, dispute', as, combining resist deem demands, formality resolution directors' meeting, disavow disapprove afoul moving orbit solely interests corporation. 36 Words symbols meaning. construing extracted setting, regard evil legislation cure mischievous startling consequences another. 'Doubt, any, survive mischiefs certain engendered *. mind rebels willing foster juggling facile obvious.' Cardozo, J., Woolford Realty Rose, 286 319, 329, 330, 52 568, 76 1128. 37 Practically speaking, serves immunize powerful, involved insist deny ruling. promise ear, breaks hope. affirmed. 1, 1: 'Every contract, combination trust otherwise, among several States, foreign nations, hereby declared illegal: Every sections 1—7 title misdemeanor, thereof, punished fine exceeding $5,000, imprisonment year, punishments, discretion court.' 70, 71, 106: 'Sec. participating dispute, thereof.' 323 706, 707, 430, 569. Compare Cir., 145 215, International Fur Union, 100 541, 547, case, argued 8, 1945. June 18, 1945, restored docket reargument, being discuss (1) prosecutions Antitrust Act; (2) relationship (b); (3) 'association organization' appearing section's (4) oral written objections Journal, Sup.Ct., U.S., October Term 1944, Pages 284—5. reargued April 29—30. 1946, again third argument. S.Rep.No. 1060, Cong., 2d Sess., Page 4. proposed substitute, criticized changing agency, defended Hearings, Subcommittee Judiciary, Senate, 1482, Part 5, 759, seq. 102. 163, 1st Sess.; H.Rep.No. 669, 1482; Hearing, S.2497. Representatives, 5315. Id., 16: effects revolution applies employers, participation, agents' knowledge. repealed restricted employees. collusion harmfully interests, antitrust grow involve dispute.' 39. H.Rep.No.669, S.Rep.No.163, 19. 'Section relates arising provided therof.' supra, 19; 75 Cong.Rec. 4507; 113(b): 13. '(b) relief him it, engaged industry, trade, craft, occupation occurs, indirect therein, officer, composed occupation.' full 19—21. Nothing 'organization' see reason restrict entities. Apparently employed draftsmen cover, generally, 11, word. form, frequently Case—Loewe Lawlor, 208 274, 301, Ann.Cas. 815, Lawlor Loewe, 235 522, 170, 59 341—involving minds. Hearings S.1482, 760, partnership theory. Kissel, 218 601, 608, 124, 126, 1168; Socony-Vacuum Oil 150, 253, 811, 858, 1129. Railway Employees' Dept. A.F.L., 283 KF105 F3 479, 492. 760: 'When came Holmes—I remember exact language, knew warranted belief—that prevailing activities, including bankers' you refer, common accepted proposition, fundamental N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence, principal agent, never heard them, am afraid curtailed 6.' Excerpts 534, 535, 171, 172, 341, explain reference: 'We agree circuit appeals proved, narrowed sanction procurement societies named. substance paid dues continued delegate interfere plaintiffs' known, belief liable, seems sufficiently guarded defen ants' rights, got ask documents, face explanation, done, publicly habitually showed interpreted. usage complained interference States.' 20. Central H.R.R. 212 481, 494, 304, 306, 307, 53 613. passed employer, own express that. fair example, 56, follows: 'You 'If exist indictment, director, ordered part. 'Likewise, list includes number stipulated Like corporations, separate entities separately apart is, examination 'In named defendants, together indicted independent your separately.' Battle 209 36, 38, 422, 423, 670. Sparf Hansen 156 51, 105, dissent 173, 715, 273, 294, 320, 39 343. Capital Traction Hof, 174 580, 585, 43 873. Bird 180 356, 361, 403, 405, 45 570: object contemplated essentials proved side bring relations adduced issues involved.' Pierce 314 62 237, 86 26. Weiler 606, 548, 495, 496; Bruno 308 287, 112, 451. Wiborg 163 632, 658, 1127, 1137, 1197, 41 289; Brasfield 272 448, 450, 135, 136, 71 345; Atkinson, 297 157, 160, 56 391, 392, 80 555. Rules Rule 27, following 354. Weems 217 349, 362, 544, 793, 705; Mahler Eby, 264 32, 45, 44 283, 288, 68 549; Sibbach Wilson 655, 427, 428, 479; Kessler Strecker, 307 22, 34, 694, 700, 83 1082. Criminal Procedure, 52(b), 687. Nolo 'is admission case,' Hudson 451, 455, 127, 129, 347; Norris, 281 619, 622, 50 424, 425, 74 1076. reviewed indictment. Hocking Valley R. 210 735, 738; Tucker 196 260, 262, L.R.A.,N.S., 802. Husty 282 703, 51 240, 242, 629, 1407; Ashcraft State Tennessee, 322 143, 155, 156, 64 921, 927, 928, 88 1192; Reconstruction Finance Corporation Prudence Securities Advisory Group, 311 579, 582, 331, 333, 364; Watts, Watts Unione Austriaca, 248 9, 21, 63 100, 323; Montgomery Ward Duncan, 243, 254, 189, 195, 196, 147. 106, Senator Blaine, cOmmittee spokesman: refer sound cases. many connected wholly lacking. 'Now, want unjust strike pass kind, attempt recognize cases.' 763. distinct conflict required. Mere ex parte affidavits establishing amount establish 'presumption' conspiracy; declined inference proof, rejecting case: 'Is presumption attaches association?' Various examples quoted Labor Injunction, Frankfurter Greene, 75. 'It appropriate define courts. Sess. (1932) 20—21. act—* (b) 113(b), 113(b).

Classification Label: 6