R. H. White Co. v. Murphy Et Al‪.‬

DOLAN, Justice. This is a bill in equity in which the plaintiff seeks to enjoin the defendants, who are officers and members of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America and officers and members of certain affiliated 'locals and are representatives from the Teamsters International Council No. 10, a Massachusetts division of the Brotherhood' from picketing the plaintiff's places of business in Cambridge and Boston. A temporary restraining order was entered on March 7, 1941. The defendants filed an answer and counterclaim seeking specific performance of a closed shop contract with the plaintiff dated January 31, 1941. Officers of the 'New England Joint Board, United Retail and Wholesale Employees of America,' hereinafter referred to as the C. I. O. union, were permitted to intervene in behalf of that Union. The Judge filed findings of fact and entered an order for final decree dismissing the defendants' counterclaim and permanently enjoining certain named officers or members of the brotherhood, and of local 829 and local 82, and representatives of the Teamsters International Council No. 10, 'from doing any of the following acts for the purpose of compelling the complainant to comply with the contract dated January 31, 1941 * * * (a) picketing complainant's place of business or in any manner causing * * * places of business to be picketed; (b) refusing to deliver or urging others to refuse to deliver goods to or from any of * * * places of business.' Thereafter, at the request of the parties, the Judge reserved and reported 'the evidence, the findings of fact and order for decree and all question of law therein for the consideration of' that court. Prior to this action by the Judge, the defendant filed a stipulation that 'pending the final decision' by this court, they would not strike or picket the plaintiff's place of business for the purpose of obtaining members or to enforce the contract dated January 31, 1941, between the plaintiff and locals 82 and 829. Final decrees were entered dismissing the bill as to four of the defendants. An interlocutory decree was also entered temporarily enjoining the plaintiff from negotiating for or entering into any contract written or oral with the C. I. O. union respecting any conditions of employment of the employees involved.