EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff,
v.
BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORATION, a Corporation; Local 2601, United Steelworkers of America; Local 2602, United Steelworkers of America; Local 2603, United Steelworkers of America; Local 3144, United Steelworkers of America; and United Steelworkers of America, Defendants.
United States District Court, W.D. New York.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
March 9, 1984.
March 9, 1984.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Div., Federal Enforcement Section (Richard Ugelow and Elaine Bloomfield, Washington, D.C., of counsel), for plaintiffs.
Windels, Marx, Davis & Ives, New York City (Anthony A. Dean, New York City, of counsel), for defendant Bethlehem Steel Corp.
Bredhoff, Gottesman, Cohen & Weinberg, Washington, D.C. (Michael Gottesman, Washington, D.C., of counsel), for defendants Locals 2601, 2602, 2603, 2604, 3144, United Steelworkers of America and United Steelworkers of America.
Arcangelo J. Petricca, Buffalo, N.Y., for individual claimant Steelworker Pickering.
Paul Shatkin, Buffalo, N.Y., for individual claimant Steelworker McRae.
Lipsitz, Green, Fahringer, Roll, Schuller & James, Buffalo, N.Y. (John R. LoGalbo, Buffalo, N.Y., of counsel), for individual claimant Steelworker Sibiga.
Clark, Wulf & Levine, New York City (Kathleen Peratis, New York City, of counsel), for individual Claimant Steelworkers Stewart, Gregory, Washington, Coleman, Verbanic, Johnson, Dixon, Davis, Pope, Washington, Lewis, Williams, Royster, Lamar, and Lockett.
Clifford Braxton, Joseph Conner, Curtis Minniefield, Robert North, Sherman Price, Jr., James Robinson and Willie Thomas, pro se.
United States District Court, W.D. New York.
CURTIN, Chief Judge.
Since the inception of this litigation, the complexity of this case has demanded the innovation of procedural devices to facilitate reconciliation. The present requests by individual Bethlehem Steel employees to alter decisions of the Special Master assigned to these complaints and to alter decisions of the Amended Decree Implementation Committee following submission to Committee reconciliation are procedurally unusual, but only because the shape...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
