applying three-year statute of limitations from § 28-3-105 to actions for inducement of breach of contract and unlawful interference with a business because “the right to be free from interference with one’s business arises under Tennessee law from every person’s ‘right of property in his own labor’”
How later courts described this case
- applying three-year statute of limitations from § 28-3-105 to actions for inducement of breach of contract and unlawful interference with a business because “the right to be free from interference with one’s business arises under Tennessee law from every person’s ‘right of property in his own labor’”
- holding that the common law tort of interference with a contract is analogous to a § 187 action
- "Rapid resolution of labor disputes is especially favored when parties to the collective bargaining agreement are involved and breakdown of the collective bargaining process is threatened. No such threat exists in this case as no labor relationship exists between the parties to this action."
- subcontractor’s claim that union engaged in strikes against general contractors in order to discourage them from dealing with the subcontractor
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
GEORGE CLIFTON EDWARDS,
dissenting.
In my opinion in this case, the six-month statute of limitations applied in DelCostello v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151 , 103 S.Ct. 2281 , 76 L.Ed.2d 476 (1983) should also be applied here. I recognize of course that the complaining party in our instant case is a company suing a union for alleged violations of the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 187 , whereas in DelCostello there was an employee suing both his union and employer.
Our present case, however, arises out of labor-management relations — as did the DelCostello case. Granting that not all cases need be handled under DelCostello’s rule — no reason appears why this one should not. I fail to see any need to turn to state law when logic suggests strongly that we apply the six months limitation.
Clearly the need for speedy resolution of disputes in the labor management arena cited in DelCostello applies equally here. Equally clearly it is desirable to maintain symmetry in the labor management field between suits against unions and suits against employers. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Or at least it should be!