United States v. International Brotherhood Of Teamsters

986 F.2d 15 (1993)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P filed suit under the Racketeer Influenced, and Corrupt Organizations statute, ('RICO') against D. P's action against D was settled in a voluntary consent order. Three appointed officials are to monitor D's efforts to rid itself of the influence of organized crime. P brought a civil contempt proceeding against D for violating a court-approved agreement resolving disciplinary charges against the Local 493officers under the Consent Decree. The Investigations Officer charged the Local 493 officers with bringing reproach upon D by failing to perform their duties as union officers and by embezzling $107,273 in union funds for the use of a fellow officer, Philip Guarnaccia. The Local 493 officers gave Guarnaccia, the former Secretary-Treasurer of Local 493, the $107,273 in the form of severance payments after he had been convicted of willfully failing to maintain accurate and complete union records, in violation of federal labor laws. The district court approved the Agreement under which the Local 493 officers agreed to repay the union $65,000 if Guarnaccia failed to pay. Local 493 officers did not uphold their side of the bargain. P brought an order to show cause why the Local 493 officers should not be held in contempt of the Agreement. P claims a settlement was reached. The terms of the Settlement are contained in a letter from P to the attorneys for the Local 493 officers, dated May 2, 1991. Ds' attorneys told the court that they were authorized to accept the Settlement on Ds' behalf. On May 17, 1991, the attorney for the Local 493 officers informed P that his clients would be willing to resign their posts rather than carry out the remaining terms of the Settlement. P conducted negotiations with the Local 493 officers' new (and current) attorney, John R. Williams, Esq., from February through July 1992, to establish terms for a settlement of the contempt proceeding which would include the resignations of the Local 493 officers. Three of the Local 493 officers resigned during this period. Attorney Williams wrote to the Government on June 19, 1992, that 'I have reviewed your letter of June 9, [1992] and I believe we may have an agreement here.' Local 493 officers refused to execute the stipulation forwarded by P embodying their acceptance of the new terms. P moved for an entry of judgment enforcing the terms of the Settlement contained in the May 2, 1991 letter. The district court granted the motion for enforcement. D appealed in that their attorney had no authority to enter into the Settlement on May 2, 1991