Zinser-Furby, Inc., and Zinser Constructors and Furby Construction Co., Inc., a Joint Venture v. San Diego County District Council of Carpenters
681 F.2d 1171·110 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3237·1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 17230
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 22, 198281-5424California110 words
Opinion
The district court did not err in its interpretation of the short form agreement or in its finding that Zinser-Furby did not meet its burden of proof in its claim that the union engaged in a secondary boycott. Zinser-Furby, Inc. v. San Diego County District Council of Carpenters, 516 F.Supp. 952 (S.D.Cal.1981).
Case-by-case adjudication is the appropriate method to use when interpreting a short form agreement. Interpreting the language in Seymour v. Coughlin, 609 F.2d 346 (9th Cir. 1979), this court reiterated its commitment to case-by-case adjudication:
Construction Teamsters Health & Welfare Trust v. Con Form Construction Corp., 657 F.2d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 1981).
The district court is AFFIRMED.