Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Hart v. United Steelworkers of America

482 F.2d 282

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1973-07-12
Topic
bankruptcy

OPINION OF THE COURT PER CURIAM. In this action two members of the United Steelworkers of America, alleging that the Union violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-34 by declaring them ineligible to run for union office because of their age, sought injunctive relief requiring that the Union facilitate their candidacies. The district court denied injunctive relief and this court denied injunctive relief pending appeal. Meanwhile on February 13, 1973 the election of union officers for a four-year term was held. The officers elected took office on June 1, 1973.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Hart v. United Steelworkers of America. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
4 opinions
HART v. UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA,482 F.2d 282(3rd Cir. 1973)
WILLIAM J. HART AND PAUL A. sTACKHOUSE, APPELLANTS, v. UNITED STEELWORKERS
OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO-C.L.C., AND I. W. ABEL, PRESIDENT, APPELLEES.
No. 72-2022.
United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
Submitted Under Third Circuit Rule 12(6) July 2, 1973.
Decided July 12, 1973.
Page 283
J. W. McIlvaine, California, Pa., Hormell, Tempest, Bigi Melenyzer, Monongahela, Pa., for appellants.

Michael H. Gottesman, Washington, D.C., and Carl Frankel, James D. English, Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.
Before GIBBONS and HUNTER, Circuit Judges.
[1] OPINION OF THE COURT
PER CURIAM.
[2] In this action two members of the United Steelworkers of America, alleging that the Union violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-34 by declaring them ineligible to run for union office because of their age, sought injunctive relief requiring that the Union facilitate their candidacies. The district court denied injunctive relief and this court denied injunctive relief pending appeal. Meanwhile on February 13, 1973 the election of union officers for a four-year term was held. The officers elected took office on June 1, 1973. Also, prior to February 13, 1973 the plaintiffs became sixty-five years of age. They are now both beyond the age protected by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 and beyond the age of eligibility for union office set forth in the union constitution. No injunctive relief can be given to plaintiffs in these circumstances, and the case is moot.E.g.,Golden v. Zwickler,394 U.S. 103, 89 S. Ct. 956, 22 L.Ed.2d 113 (1969); Colpo v. Highway Truck Drivers, Local 107,305 F.2d 362(3d Cir.), cert. denied,371 U.S. 890, 83 S.Ct. 188, 9 L.Ed.2d 123 (1962).

[3] This appeal will be dismissed and the case remanded to district court where the judgment appealed from will be vacated as moot.SeeUnited States v. Munsingwear, Inc.,340 U.S. 36, 71 S.Ct. 104, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950).Page 350