Laserfiche WebLink
374 MINE WORKERS 'U. COAL CO, ~ 1Z9 COlO. <br />declaratory judgment as to the rights of all parties in- <br />';,~ terested as such rights may stem from ouI• interpretation <br />ij of the a•iginal grant. <br />~ ',, <br />..~ <br />`1 No. 17,330. <br />~~' <br />i ~ UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA ET AL, t>. <br />SUNLIGHT COAL COR'IPAN1'. <br />1i <br />'i Decided May 3, ]054. Rehearing denied May 24, 1054. <br />a` i <br />ii`i A proceeding involving the discharge of employees, <br />,~,: allegedly contrary to pertinent provisions of the Labor <br />Peace Act. The trial court held that the Industrial Com- <br />~`' mission was without jurisdiction of the cause. <br />~. <br />~..: <br />Reversed. <br />S~~llabus b~ Chief Justice Stone. <br />l 1. The Phrase "regularly engages" as used in section 2 (2l of <br />the Labor Peace Act refers to the question of «~hether the oc- <br />~1 currence is or is not in an established mode or plan in the opera- <br />lion of the business, and has not reference to the constancy of <br />i the occurrence. <br />` •, 2. Employers' business judgment in the operation of their busi- <br />iI ness must be limited by the applicable requirements of statutes. <br />:~ <br />Error to the District Court of Garfield County, <br />` Hon. Ciif ford. H. Darrow, Judge. <br />v'• • <br />Mr. Dune W. DUNHAR, Attorney General, Mr. F''RANK <br />A. WACHOB, Deputy, R4r. PETER L. DsE, Assistant, for <br />plaintiff in error Industrial Commission. <br />Mr. NEIL S. MrrlceR, for defendant in error. <br />•1. <br />• ` , En Banc. <br />