SMITH METROPOLITAN MARKET CO LIMITED v. LYONS (1939)

Plaintiff sued to restrain defendants from maintaining pickets at plaintiff's place of business and from advertising such business as unfair to organized labor. The defendants answered admitting the essential facts alleged, and the cause was tried on its merits.

The trial court found that no labor dispute existed between the employer and any of his employees; that the plaintiff paid his employees more than the union scale of wages with hours of labor less than the union scale prevailing in the vicinity; that the plaintiff had not discriminated against any member of the local labor union represented by defendants, and had not objected to any of his employees joining such or any other labor union; that no one of said employees had requested said local union to represent him in any manner of negotiations with the employer; that all of said employees have expressed the desire to bargain with the employer through representatives of their own choosing and not through any of the defendants; that the purpose of all the activities complained of was “to compel the plaintiff to force its employees to join the defendant unincorporated associations and labor unions and their locals, even though such joining would be against the will and without the voluntary consent of such employees”. (Italics ours.)

The injunction which followed was based upon the ground that the acts complained of were unlawful because they were designed to compel the employer to execute a contract which was declared to be unlawful and against public policy. For the reasons stated in McKay v. Retail Auto Salesmen's Local Union No. 1067 et al., Cal.App., 89 P.2d 426, this day decided, the judgment is affirmed.

NOURSE, Presiding Justice.

We concur: STURTEVANT, J.; SPENCE, J.