Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Taft-Hartley Sections 301 And 303 Procedural Aspects, Joseph F. Dirisio, Joseph Martin Jr.
Taft-Hartley Sections 301 And 303 Procedural Aspects, Joseph F. Dirisio, Joseph Martin Jr.
Vanderbilt Law Review
The motives and purposes behind the binate Sections 301 and 303, no less than other sections of the Taft-Hartley Act,' are mixed and ambiguous. Foremost, however, seems the notion that Congress intended to create new federal rights, contract and tort, enforceable nationally in a federal forum. In broad terms, where the required relationship to interstate commerce exists, Section 301 permits suits by either employers or unions for violation of collective bargaining agreements; Section 303 permits those injured by certain boycotts and unlawful combinations to bring suit-- in both cases, the forum provided is the district court of the United States. …
Tort Liability To Third Parties Arising From Breach Of Contract - Otis Elevator Company V. Embert
Tort Liability To Third Parties Arising From Breach Of Contract - Otis Elevator Company V. Embert
Maryland Law Review
No abstract provided.
Contribution - Methods Of Enforcing - O'Keefe V. Baltimore Transit Co.
Contribution - Methods Of Enforcing - O'Keefe V. Baltimore Transit Co.
Maryland Law Review
No abstract provided.
Liability Of Tavernkeeper For Subsequent Act Of Intoxicated Patron - State V. Hatfield
Liability Of Tavernkeeper For Subsequent Act Of Intoxicated Patron - State V. Hatfield
Maryland Law Review
No abstract provided.
Amusement Parks - Liability Of Owner For Injury On Concessionaire's Device - Kuhn V. Carlin
Amusement Parks - Liability Of Owner For Injury On Concessionaire's Device - Kuhn V. Carlin
Maryland Law Review
No abstract provided.