United Mine Workers of America District No. 5 v. Consolidation Coal Company

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that in order to constitute a settlement agreement, the language of the agreement must be clear
• finding that “[i]f the court has any doubt, the parties should be returned to their grievance procedure and arbitration, for it is an arbitrator, and not the court, who is to decide whether the same issue has already been resolved in an earlier proceeding”
• terms of settlement as to contracting out of repair and maintenance work too general to permit enforcement
• “[I]t is an arbitrator, and not the court, who is to decide whether the same issue has already been resolved in an earlier proceeding.”
• action brought by union to enforce a settlement agreement between company and union affecting the contracting out of repair and maintenance work
• “[I]t is an arbitrator, and not the court, who is to decide whether the same issue has already been resolved in an earlier proceeding.” (citations omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).