Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

International Union, United Mine Workers v. Bagwell

United States Supreme Court
512 U.S. 821 (1994)


Facts

The United Mine Workers International Union (the Union) (defendant) was engaged in a protracted labor dispute with certain companies (plaintiffs). These companies sued the Union in April 1989 to enjoin future unlawful strike activities. The trial court entered an injunction prohibiting the Union and its members from engaging in certain unlawful conduct. Subsequently, the trial court found that the Union had violated the injunction many times and announced future violations would be punished by a predetermined fine. The trial court held additional contempt hearings and found the union in contempt for over 400 violations of the injunction. The trial court conducted the contempt hearings as civil proceedings without a jury. The trial court fined the Union over $64 million. Approximately $12 million of the fine was ordered to be paid to the companies, with the remainder to be paid to the state and county governments. The companies and the Union settled their dispute and agreed to vacate the contempt fines. The trial court permitted the portion of the fines payable to the companies to be discharged, but refused to vacate the portion payable to the state and counties. The trial court appointed John Bagwell (plaintiff) to collect the fines owed to the state and counties. The Union appealed to the Virginia Court of Appeals, which reversed. Bagwell appealed to the Supreme Court of Virginia, which upheld the fine. The Union then petitioned the United States Supreme Court for review.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Blackmun, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence (Ginsburg, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence (Scalia, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.