Cases 1 - 7 of 7
DRIVERS, CHAUFFEURS AND HELPERS LOCAL UNION NO. 639 v. WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY
as 1:2021cv02481
Plaintiff:
DRIVERS, CHAUFFEURS AND HELPERS LOCAL UNION NO. 639
Defendant:
WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Drivers, Chauffeurs and Helpers, Local Union No. 639 v. S. Freedman & Sons, Inc.
as 1:2018cv00814
Plaintiff:
Drivers, Chauffeurs and Helpers, Local Union No. 639
Defendant:
S. Freedman & Sons, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 185
NLRB v. S. Freedman & Sons, Inc.
as 16-2270
Petitioner:
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Respondent:
S. FREEDMAN & SONS, INC.
Intervenor:
DRIVERS, CHAUFFEURS AND HELPERS LOCAL UNION NO. 639
NLRB v. Daycon Products Company, Inc.
as 12-1022
Petitioner:
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Intervenor:
DRIVERS, CHAUFFEURS AND HELPERS LOCAL UNION NO. 639
Respondent:
DAYCON PRODUCTS COMPANY, INC.
Diggs v. Drivers, Chauffeurs and Helpers Local Union No. 639
as 8:2011cv02404
Plaintiff:
Donald A. Diggs
Defendant:
Drivers, Chauffeurs and Helpers Local Union No. 639
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
James Howell v. Truck Drivers and Helpers Loca
as 08-1548
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES H. HOWELL, ROBERT S. MARSHALL, GLENROY SCHISSLER and others
Plaintiff:
JACK RUSHING
Defendant - Appellee:
TRUCK DRIVERS AND HELPERS LOCAL UNION NO. 355, DRIVERS, CHAUFFEURS AND HELPERS LOCAL UNION NO. 639, TEAMSTERS 639 EMPLOYERS PENSION TRUST FUND and others
Defendant - None:
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, TEAMSTERS JOINT COUNCIL NO. 55 and UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INCORPORATED
Howell et al v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters et al
as 1:2007cv00989
Plaintiff:
James H. Howell, James H. Howell, Robert S. Marshall and others
Defendant:
Truck Drivers and Helpers Local Union No. 355, Truck Drivers and Helpers Local Union No. 355, Drivers, Chauffeurs and Helpers Local Union No. 639 and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
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.
