United Mine Workers v. Pennington

E666874

United Mine Workers v. Pennington is a 1965 U.S. Supreme Court antitrust case that examined whether a union’s collective bargaining activities with employers could be subject to Sherman Act liability.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Surface forms Statements Referenced by

Observed surface forms (1)

Statements (45)

Predicate Object
instanceOf U.S. Supreme Court case
antitrust case
labor law case
affects scope of nonstatutory labor exemption to antitrust laws
areaOfLaw U.S. federal antitrust law
U.S. federal labor law
citation 381 U.S. 657
concernedActivity alleged conspiracy to eliminate competition among coal operators
collective bargaining over wage rates
concernedIndustry coal industry
concurringOpinionBy Justice Douglas NERFINISHED
country United States of America
surface form: United States
court Supreme Court of the United States
decisionDate 1965-04-05
decisionType majority decision with dissents
dissentingOpinionBy Justice Fortas NERFINISHED
Justice Goldberg NERFINISHED
Justice Harlan NERFINISHED
Justice Stewart NERFINISHED
docketNumber No. 83
fullName United Mine Workers of America v. Pennington NERFINISHED
holding A union and employers may be subject to Sherman Act liability when they combine to impose a wage scale intended to drive competitors out of business.
Union conduct is not automatically exempt from antitrust laws when it involves combinations with nonlabor groups to achieve anticompetitive objectives.
involvesParty Pennington NERFINISHED
United Mine Workers of America NERFINISHED
issue Whether a union’s collective bargaining activities with employers can be subject to Sherman Act liability.
jurisdiction federal question jurisdiction
legalSubject Clayton Act NERFINISHED
Sherman Act NERFINISHED
antitrust law
collective bargaining
labor law
nonstatutory labor exemption
majorityOpinionBy Justice White NERFINISHED
pageInUnitedStatesReports 657
proceduralPosture appeal from the United States Court of Appeals
relatedCase Allen Bradley Co. v. Local Union No. 3 NERFINISHED
Apex Hosiery Co. v. Leader NERFINISHED
Local 189, Amalgamated Meat Cutters v. Jewel Tea Co. NERFINISHED
relatedDoctrine labor antitrust exemption
statuteInterpreted Clayton Act NERFINISHED
Sherman Antitrust Act NERFINISHED
subsequentCitationFrequency frequently cited
volumeOfUnitedStatesReports 381
yearDecided 1965

Referenced by (2)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited relatedCase United Mine Workers v. Pennington
Noerr-Pennington doctrine extendedInCase United Mine Workers v. Pennington
this entity surface form: United Mine Workers of America v. Pennington