Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Arbitration between LOS ANGELES LOCAL JOINT EXECUTIVE BOARD OF CULINARY WORKERS AND BARTENDERS, A. F. OF L. STAN'S DRIVE-INS, Inc. Walter COWAN for and on behalf of LOS ANGELES LOCAL JOINT EXECUTIVE BOARD OF CULINARY WORKERS AND BARTENDERS, A. F. of L., Respondent, v. STAN'S DRIVE-INS, Inc., Appellant.
This is a companion case to In the Matter of Arbitration between Los Angeles Local Joint Executive Board of Culinary Workers and Bartenders, A.F. of L., and Stan's Drive-Ins, Inc., Cal.App., 288 P.2d 286, and to the same titled case, Cal.App., 288 P.2d 291. Reference is made to those opinions for the facts.
After Stan's Drive-Ins, called Stan's, had appealed from the order of May 27, 1954 requiring it to give an undertaking, the court on motion of respondent Union made an order that Stan's execute and file with the court a written undertaking by two or more good and sufficient personal sureties or a corporate surety in the sum of $25,000, conditioned for the performance of the order of May 27, 1954 ‘if the said Order is affirmed or the said appeal therefrom is dismissed, said undertaking to be for the protection of all parties entitled to payments under and by virtue of the arbitration award confirmed, as modified and corrected, by said Judgment Order herein of February 18, 1954, and said Judgment Order.’ Stan's appeals from this later order.
Stan's makes the same contentions on this appeal as it made on the appeal from the order of May 27, 1954. There is no distinction between this appeal and that one, and the result here must be that reached there.
On the authority of In the Matter of Arbitration between Los Angeles Local Joint Executive Board of Culinary Workers and Bartenders, A.F. of L., and Stan's Drive-Ins., Inc., Cal.App., 288 P.2d 286, the order is affirmed.
VALLEÉ, Justice.
SHINN, P. J., and PARKER WOOD, J., concur. Hearing denied; EDMONDS, SCHAUER and SPENCE, JJ., dissenting.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: Civ. 21012.
Decided: October 11, 1955
Court: District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 3, California.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)