United Steelworkers of America v. Superior Pacific Galvanizing Company

103 F.3d 143 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SUPERIOR PACIFIC GALVANIZING COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. No. 95-55880. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Nov. 6, 1996. Decided Nov. 19, 1996. Before: BROWNING, THOMPSON and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 The United Steelworkers of America (Union) appeals from the district court's judgment, following a bench trial, in favor of employer Superior Pacific Galvanizing Company (Superior Pacific). In its first amended complaint, the Union sought to compel arbitration of a grievance under a 1989-1992 collective bargaining agreement or, alternatively, under an alleged successor collective bargaining agreement. The district court denied the motion to compel arbitration. It determined the parties had not entered into a successor agreement and that the Union was equitably estopped from asserting that the 1989-1992 agreement…