Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

ALEX LAZAR AND LINDA LAZAR v. RUR INDUSTRIES (01/11/85)

filed: January 11, 1985.

ALEX LAZAR AND LINDA LAZAR, HIS WIFE
v.
RUR INDUSTRIES, INC., APPELLANT, V. THE UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO-CLC, AND LOCAL 9051 OF THE UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO-CLC, APPELLEES



No. 00220 Pittsburgh 1983, Appeal from the Judgment entered February 15, 1983, in the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County, Civil at No. 2359-A-1982.

COUNSEL

Thomas M. Lent, Erie, for appellant.

Richard T. Ruth, Erie, for LaZar, appellees.

Rudolph L. Milasich, Jr., Pittsburgh, for United Steelworkers, appellees.

Richard E. Gordon, Pittsburgh, for Local 9051, appellees.

Spaeth, President Judge, and Brosky and Olszewski, JJ. Spaeth, President Judge, concurs in the result.

Author: Olszewski

[ 337 Pa. Super. Page 447]

In this case, appellant RUR Industries, Inc., appeals the lower court's order dismissing its complaint against two additional defendants, the United Steelworkers and Local 9051 ("the unions"). After carefully examining the facts, the complaint and the law, we affirm the judgment.

The roots of this case are in a labor dispute between Local 9051 and RUR. Alex LaZar, a member of Local 9051 who was on picket duty, was injured in a melee at 1 a.m. August 27, 1981. He sued RUR for negligence, alleging

[ 337 Pa. Super. Page 448]

    that the company failed to disperse the mob of off-duty employees which attacked him, failed to post security guards to prevent such attacks and failed to control its employees. These acts and omissions, he alleged, constituted negligence and caused his injuries.*fn1

RUR denied his allegations and filed a complaint against the unions, charging that they had sanctioned an atmosphere of harassment, vandalism and violence such that "there was great susceptibility to the outbreak of violence."*fn2 RUR averred that the unions were solely liable for the injuries, or that the unions were liable in indemnity to RUR, or that the unions were jointly and severally liable with RUR.

The trial court, on appellees' preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer, sustained the objections and dismissed the complaint against the unions, stating that it failed to state a cause of action. Appellant had failed to allege that the non-striking workers who had caused the injuries were acting under the direction of the additional ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.