Reply – Re: AMALGAMATED & the ALL WRITS ACT
Your Name
Subject
Message
or Cancel
In Reply To
Re: AMALGAMATED & the ALL WRITS ACT
— by Ted Ted
US. v. IBT 732 F. Supp. 1032 (1990), excerpt:

....under the All Writs Act courts may issue injunctions to enjoin other proceedings when the unique character of the litigation requires that relief be determined "flexibly." New York Telephone, supra, 434 U.S. at 173, 98 S.Ct. at 372. A federal court has the power "to issue commands under the All Writs Act as may be necessary or appropriate to effectuate and prevent the frustration of orders it has previously issued in the exercise of jurisdiction otherwise obtained." Id. at 174, 98 S.Ct. at 373. The All Writs Act also grants courts the authority to bind non-parties to an action "when needed to preserve the Court's ability to reach or enforce its decision in a case over which it has proper jurisdiction." Baldwin-United, supra, 770 F.2d at 338; see New York Telephone, supra, 434 U.S. at 172, 98 S.Ct. at 372, cf. Vuitton et Fils
__________________________________________

Whether you like it or not, Local 1456 (now 1556) fails the subordinate entity test and you are bound by the terms & conditions of the Consent Decree. Running to the NLRB, who is itself biased and willing to overlook its own precedents in representation elections in order to further its political agenda relative to their multiple failed EFCA bids will also not save you.