John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston

John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided March 30, 1964
Full case name	John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston
Citations	376 U.S. 543 ( more )
Holding
Rights of employees under a collective bargaining agreement are not automatically lost by the disappearance by merger of the employer, and, in appropriate circumstances, the successor employer may be required to arbitrate under the contract. Particularly, the courts determine whether arbitration is required, based on the agreement and federal law.
Court membership
Chief Justice Earl Warren Associate Justices Hugo Black  · William O. Douglas Tom C. Clark  · John M. Harlan II William J. Brennan Jr.  · Potter Stewart Byron White  · Arthur Goldberg
Case opinion
Majority	Harlan, joined by unanimous
Goldberg took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Laws applied
Labor Management Relations Act

John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston, 376 U.S. 543(1964), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that rights of employees under a collective bargaining agreement are not automatically lost by the disappearance by merger of the employer, and, in appropriate circumstances, the successor employer may be required to arbitrate under the contract. Particularly, the courts determine whether arbitration is required, based on the agreement and federal law. ^{[1] [2]}

Background

Respondent labor union brought an action under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act to compel arbitration under a collective bargaining agreement executed by a company which the petitioner acquired by merger. The federal district court denied relief, but the Court of Appeals reversed and directed arbitration. ^[1]

Opinion of the court

The court issued an opinion on March 30, 1964. ^[1] Among other things, the Supreme Court said that courts need to balance the new management's prerogative to shuffle the business around with the employee's need to be protected from unfairness. The disposition of the case was an orer that Wiley enter arbitration even though it never consented to an arbitration agreement itself. ^[2]

References

1. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston, 376 U.S. 543 (1964).
2. Michael Z. Green & Douglas L. Leslie, Labor Law in a Nutshell 307 (2022)

External links

• Text of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston, 376 U.S. 543(1964) is available from: Cornell Findlaw Justia

This article incorporates written opinion of a United States federal court. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the text is in the public domain .