No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Lowe Excavating prevailed on claims of tortious interference with contractual relationship and prospective economic advantage against the Union and its business agent Darling, who picketed based on inadequate investigation of wage compliance on a federally-funded project where prevailing wages were being paid.
Lowe Excavating Co. v. International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 150
This case involved a dispute between Lowe Excavating Company and a labor union. The union and its business agent organized a picket against Lowe Excavating at a federally-funded construction project, claiming the company wasn't paying proper wages to workers. However, the company argued that it was actually paying the required prevailing wages and that the union had not properly investigated before starting the picket.
The court ruled in favor of Lowe Excavating Company. The judge found that the union had wrongfully interfered with the company's business relationships and future economic opportunities by picketing without conducting an adequate investigation first. The company was awarded $4,680 in damages from the union.
What this means for workers: This ruling highlights the importance of unions conducting thorough investigations before taking action like picketing. While unions have the right to advocate for fair wages and working conditions, they must have solid evidence to support their claims. Workers should know that both employers and unions can be held legally accountable for their actions, and that proper research and documentation are crucial when workplace disputes arise.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Other orders and opinions in Lowe Excavating Co. v. International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 150 from the same court.
1. Employer and Employee — wrongful discharge — reporting misconduct to management — evidence sufficient The trial court erred by granting defendants' motion for directed verdict on a claim for the wrongful discharge of an at-will employee where the claim was based upon a retaliatory termination…
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 3 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.