Court Opinion

ID: 9446935
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 22:22:07.726048+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:30:50.807455
License: Public Domain

WILBUR K. MILLER, Circuit Judge
(concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I dissent from the paragraph of the majority opinion which deals with Paragraph 14 of the consent decree. That Paragraph obligates the Teamsters to pay the plaintiffs’ counsel fees, the amount being subject to the approval of the District Court. The amount allowed is now on appeal to us in case No. 14,733 and, I think, should be disposed of there.
Although conceding that the giving of notice concerning Paragraph 14 to the membership of the Teamsters union is not “strictly required” by Rule 23, the majority say notice should nevertheless be given. They suspend this provision of Paragraph 14 “to await the outcome of the notice.” I see no reason to require that notice be given, or to suspend the provision.
Otherwise I concur in Judge FAHY’S opinion.