Anthony J. Calabrese et al. v. the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, and Local 69 of the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada,the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Appellant.anthony J. Calabrese et al. v. the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, and Local 69 of the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada,local 69 of the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Appellant, 324 F.2d 955 (3d Cir. 1964)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - 324 F.2d 955 (3d Cir. 1964) Argued September 24, 1963
Decided December 19, 1963
Rehearing Denied February 13, 1964

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey; Reynier J. Wortendyke, Jr., Judge.

Patrick C. O'Donoghue and Martin F. O'Donoghue, Washington, D. C. (Brogan & Wolff, Jersey City, N. J., on the brief), for United Association, etc. appellant in No. 14378.

Edward F. Zampella, Jersey City, N. J., for Local 69, etc., appellant in No. 14379 for appellants.

John A. Craner, Elizabeth, N. J., for appellees Calabrese et al.

Before BIGGS, Chief Judge, and KALODNER and GANEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.


We have examined carefully the record and the briefs of the parties presented by these appeals, taken by Local 69 and its parent association, and have considered all the points raised. We can perceive no error in the proceedings in the court below and accordingly the order appealed from will be affirmed on the cogent opinion of Judge Wortendyke, D. C., 211 F. Supp. 609.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.