Court Opinion

ID: 9422347
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:02:13.23988+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:36.017984
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Frankfurter,
concurring.
I wholly agree with the Court in rejecting the restrictive meaning given by the Court of Appeals to “contracts” in § 301 (a) of the Labor Management Relations Act. I have, however, serious doubt whether the “statement of understanding” on the basis of which the strike was settled was in fact a contract, in the sense of a consensual arrangement between the Retail Clerks and Lion Dry Goods, rather than a formulation of the results of the intercession of a public-spirited intermediary on the basis of which each side was prepared to lay down its arms. However, on a matter of construing a particular document, in light of the surrounding circumstances, I do not desire to dissent.