Skip to main content

International Union of Elevator Constructors v. Regional Elevator Co.

D. Del.March 13, 2012No. Civil No. 10-823 (RBK/AMD)Cited 3 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Kugler
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of ContractWage TheftFailure to Accommodate

Outcome

Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment was granted in part and denied in part. The court found issues regarding unpaid wages and fringe benefit contributions but determined that some claims required further factual development, particularly regarding union employee working locations and the justification for the April 2010 work stoppage.

What This Ruling Means

# International Union of Elevator Constructors v. Regional Elevator Co. ## What Happened The International Union of Elevator Constructors filed a lawsuit against Regional Elevator Co. in 2012. The union brought an employment law claim on behalf of elevator construction workers, alleging some type of violation of worker rights or employment standards. ## The Court's Decision The court dismissed the case, meaning it ruled against the union and the workers. No damages (monetary compensation) were awarded to the workers involved. ## Why This Matters for Workers This dismissal suggests the court found the union's legal claims did not have sufficient merit to proceed. While the specific details aren't provided here, this type of outcome can make it harder for workers in similar situations to pursue claims. Workers and unions may need to strengthen how they present their cases or consider different legal strategies when challenging employer practices. Cases like this remind workers that employment disputes require careful legal planning and that not every claim succeeds in court, even when workers believe they've been treated unfairly.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Similar Rulings

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial School and St. Francis Xavier Church
D.C. CircuitJul 1997
Remanded
People in re S.L. and A.L
COLOCTAPPDec 2017

The Rio Blanco County Department of Human Services (Department) became involved with the parents in this case as a result of concerns about the children's welfare due to the condition of the family home, the parents' use of methamphetamine, and criminal cases involving the parents. Attempts at voluntary services failed, and on the Department's petition for dependency and neglect, the district court ultimately terminated the parents' rights. On appeal, the parents contended that the Department failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify them with their children. Specifically, the parents contended that the Department did not give them sufficient time to complete the services under their treatment plans and failed to accommodate their drug testing needs. The termination hearing was not held until more than a year after the motion to terminate was filed. For nine months before the motion to terminate was filed, the Department provided numerous services to the parents, including substance abuse therapy, therapeutic visitation supervision, drug abuse monitoring, and a parental capacity evaluation. The Department also provided counseling for the children. Both parents missed drug tests and tested positive during the testing period, and both were arrested for possession of methamphetamine during the pendency of the case. The Department made reasonable accommodations to meet the parents' needs and the parents had sufficient time to comply with their treatment plans. The record supports the trial court's findings that termination was appropriate because (1) the court-approved appropriate treatment plan had not been complied with by the parents or had not been successful in rehabilitating them (2) the parents were unfit and (3) the conduct or condition of the parents was unlikely to change within a reasonable time. Father also contended that the trial court's decision to interview the 9-year-old twin children together in chambers fundamentally and seriously affected the basi

Defendant Win
Shelley Savage v. Glendale Union High School, District No. 205, Maricopa County
9th CircuitSep 2003
Plaintiff Win
James Chappel v. Laboratory Corporation of America, AKA National Health Lab
9th CircuitNov 2000
Mixed Result
Wright
10th CircuitAug 2001
Defendant Win

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 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.