Court Opinion

ID: 9696115
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 18:36:51.212154+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:18.712475
License: Public Domain

Dethmers, C. J.
I concur with Mr. Justice Black
in affirmance. Insofar as the first division of plaintiff’s bill of complaint is concerned, seeking his restoration to union membership and injunctive relief against interference therewith, I agree with Justice Black’s position and reasoning that plaintiff’s bill must fall for lack of allegations of due -exhaustion of union remedies.
As for the bill’s second division, seeking to enjoin «expenditure of union funds for political purposes, plaintiff’s bill evidently plants his right, and we hold •that his right to be heard in court on that subject is dependent on his union membership or right thereto sought to be established by the bill’s first division. It follows that, with the first division of the bill falling for stated reasons, the second must fall with it.
Affirmed.
Carr, Kelly, Smith, Edwards, Kavanagh, and Souris, JJ., concurred with Dethmebs, C. J.