Wal-Mart sues unions for trespassing
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has filed trespassing claims against a grocery workers union and several other groups that have protested on the grounds of its stores in Florida.
March 26, 2013 at 07:09 AM
7 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has filed trespassing claims against a grocery workers union and several other groups that have protested on the grounds of its stores in Florida.
The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, its subsidiary OUR Walmart and several other defendants broke state law by trespassing and picketing at several Wal-Mart stores during the past eight months, according to the lawsuit. Wal-Mart employees in the U.S. are not unionized, but the store has still attracted the ire of labor groups lobbying for higher pay, better benefits and steady hours.
Representatives for the discount retailer say that the company filed the lawsuit after multiple warnings, and that it is intended to protect customers and other employees from “further disruptive tactics associated with [the] continued, illegal trespassing.”
These tactics allegedly include passing out reading materials to customers inside one Orlando Wal-Mart and later handing “a rotten pumpkin painted in support of OUR Walmart” to the store manager of the same location.
The defendants in the suit, however, accuse Wal-Mart of trying to silence its workers. “Rather than creating good jobs with steady hours and affordable healthcare, Walmart's pattern is to focus its energies on infringing on our freedom of speech,” OUR Walmart said in a statement to Reuters.
Wal-Mart is seeking a court order preventing the defendants from demonstrating at its stores or confronting employees or customers.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of unions and other labor issues, see:
The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, its subsidiary OUR Walmart and several other defendants broke state law by trespassing and picketing at several
Representatives for the discount retailer say that the company filed the lawsuit after multiple warnings, and that it is intended to protect customers and other employees from “further disruptive tactics associated with [the] continued, illegal trespassing.”
These tactics allegedly include passing out reading materials to customers inside one Orlando
The defendants in the suit, however, accuse
For more InsideCounsel coverage of unions and other labor issues, see:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 minute readOld Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Lawsuit Against Amazon Could Reshape E-Commerce Landscape
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250