US SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

1. Refusal of a labor union to admit to membership the employees of an interstate motor carrier, and refusal of members of the union to accept employment by the carrier -- even though as a result it was impossible for the carrier to continue in business -- held not a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, as amended. P. 325 U. S. 823.

2. That the refusal of members of the union to accept employment by the carrier stemmed from personal antagonism toward a partner in the carrier firm -- arising out of the killing of a union man, of which the partner was acquitted -- did not render such refusal a violation of the Sherman Act. P. 325 U. S. 824.

3. The fact that the refusal of the union members to accept employment was related to the business of an interstate carrier did not make such refusal a violation of the Sherman Act. P. 325 U. S. 825.

4. A labor union's breach of duty to employees in a collective bargaining group is not, of itself, a violation of the Sherman Act. P. 325 U. S. 826.

5. The Sherman Act does not afford a remedy for every tort committed by or against persons engaged in interstate commerce. P. 325 U. S. 826.

6. The question whether the conduct of the union and its members is actionable under state law is not here involved. P. 325 U. S. 826.

143 F.2d 902 affirmed.

Certiorari, 323 U.S. 704, to review the affirmance of a judgment for the defendants, 47 F.Supp. 571, in a suit for an injunction and treble damages under the Sherman Act. chanrobles.com-red

Page 325 U. S. 822