The applicable rule of law for this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P manufactures frames for school buses and medium-duty trucks. Local 486 (D) is the union representative of three hundred thirty production and maintenance employees at the facility. Local 486 (D) began a strike against P. On that afternoon, P filed a complaint against Local 486 (D) and other defendants associated with the local. The complaint demanded damages and injunctive relief from Ds’ “mass picketing, violence, breach of the peace, trespass and interference with * * * P's manufacturing operation.” The court issued a TRO restraining Ds “and any and all persons acting in concert with any of them” from engaging in various acts, including: (a) threatening or intimidating persons coming to and from P; (b) blocking or obstructing entrances to the facility; (c) threatening, intimidating, or committing physical violence against P employees or customers; (d) trespassing or parking vehicles on P’s property; (e) following or intercepting the vehicles of P employees or customers; (f) obstructing entrances to the facility; (g) interfering with or damaging P’s property; and (h) picketing or congregating at or near the facility, except for peaceful picketing by a maximum of two persons near any entrance to the facility. Copies of the TRO were to be posted by the sheriff’s department prominently at the facility. The local president, Don McGhee, was present when the TRO was issued. P’s attorney personally served the attorney for Local 486 (D) with a copy of the TRO in the presence of the same union officials. P posted copies of the TRO at each entrance to the facility. P also attempted to serve persons then picketing at the facility. The sheriff’s department also posted the TRO at the facility and delivered a copy of the TRO to the union hall. An article appeared in the Cleveland Plain Dealer reporting that a TRO had been issued. P filed a charge of contempt against Ds (Tom Gregg, Dennis Monahan, Ron Orbas, Steve Vano, Doyle Titlow, Larry Langford, and Jeffrey Markiewicz), alleging that they had violated the TRO. P obtained an amended TRO, which clarified paragraph h of the order by providing that mass picketing or congregating could not occur “within 1,000 feet” of the facility, except for peaceful picketing by a maximum of two persons near any entrance to the facility. Ten days later, P filed a motion against Leon Tate, alleging that he had violated the TRO. Tate was a chief shop steward for Local 486 (D). At trial, P introduced evidence that Ds, except for Tate and Gregg, had thrown rocks or eggs at the vehicles of replacement workers entering or leaving the main gate of the facility. The misconduct by Gregg and Tate was not captured on videotape, but a replacement worker testified that Gregg knocked him off his bicycle on the morning of June 3 as he tried to enter the facility through the main gate. A truck driver testified that Tate and another man followed him from the facility on June 8, in an incident that eventually escalated into a personal confrontation between the truck driver and Tate, during which Tate allegedly brandished a knife. The trial court found Ds guilty of contempt. The court sentenced each to thirty days in jail, a $500 fine, and two years’ probation. The court of appeals affirmed. The standard of the court and the appeals court was that Ds simply have general knowledge of the contents of the order to be held liable. The convictions were affirmed on appeal. Ds appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.