Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Company, The v. Association of Employees of the St. Louis Plant

Justia Dockets & Filings Eighth Circuit Missouri Eastern District Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Company, The v. Association of Employees of the St. Louis Plant

Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Company, The v. Association of Employees of the St. Louis Plant

Plaintiff:	Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Company, The
Defendant:	Association of Employees of the St. Louis Plant
Case Number:	4:2018cv01026
Filed:	June 25, 2018
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office:	St. Louis Office
County:	St. Louis - City
Presiding Judge:	Noelle C. Collins
Nature of Suit:	Labor/Management Relations
Cause of Action:	09 U.S.C. § 0010
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
September 30, 2019	Filing 37 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment ECF No. 22 is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants motion for summary judgment ECF No. 26 is GRANTED in part. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the April 17, 2018 Opinion and Award In the matter of Arbitration between Procter & Gamble, Mfg. Co. and Association of Employees of the St. Louis Plant is CONFIRMED and shall be enforced. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Procter & Gamble must immediately rei nstate Nick Hassard with full back pay from April 23, 2018 through the date of reinstatement. P&G must also include 9% interest on the total amount of back payment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Association of Employees of the St. Louis Plants request for attorney's fees and costs is DENIED. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 9/30/19. (ARL)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 30, 2019

Filing 37 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment ECF No. 22 is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants motion for summary judgment ECF No. 26 is GRANTED in part. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the April 17, 2018 Opinion and Award In the matter of Arbitration between Procter & Gamble, Mfg. Co. and Association of Employees of the St. Louis Plant is CONFIRMED and shall be enforced. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Procter & Gamble must immediately rei nstate Nick Hassard with full back pay from April 23, 2018 through the date of reinstatement. P&G must also include 9% interest on the total amount of back payment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Association of Employees of the St. Louis Plants request for attorney's fees and costs is DENIED. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 9/30/19. (ARL)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Company, The v. Association of Employees of the St. Louis Plant
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Company, The
Represented By:	Michael Aldana
Represented By:	Tyler John Roth
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Association of Employees of the St. Louis Plant
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?