Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey.

AT&T TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA et al. (1986)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Seal of the Supreme Court of the United States
AT&T TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA et al.
Term: 1985
Important Dates
Argued: January 22, 1986
Decided: April 7, 1986
Outcome
Vacated and remanded
Vote
9-0
Majority
Harry BlackmunSandra Day O'ConnorLewis PowellWilliam RehnquistJohn Paul StevensByron White
Concurring
William BrennanWarren BurgerThurgood Marshall

AT&T TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA et al. is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on April 7, 1986. The case was argued before the court on January 22, 1986.

In a 9-0 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the ruling of the lower court and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion. The case originated from the Illinois Northern U.S. District Court.

For a full list of cases decided in the 1980s, click here. For a full list of cases decided by the Burger Court, click here.

[1]

About the case

  • Subject matter: Unions - Arbitration (in the context of labor-management or employer-employee relations) (cf. arbitration)
  • Petitioner: employer. If employer's relations with employees are governed by the nature of the employer's business (e.g., railroad, boat), rather than labor law generally, the more specific designation is used in place of Employer.
  • Petitioner state: Unknown
  • Respondent type: Union, labor organization, or official of
  • Respondent state: Unknown
  • Citation: 475 U.S. 643
  • How the court took jurisdiction: Cert
  • What type of decision was made: Opinion of the court (orally argued)
  • Who was the chief justice: Warren Burger
  • Who wrote the majority opinion: Byron White

These data points were accessed from The Supreme Court Database, which also attempts to categorize the ideological direction of the court's ruling in each case. This case's ruling was categorized as liberal.

See also

External links

Footnotes