Mob FilesPublic-domain archive of American organized crime

Record

Court opinion

1996-06-18

CourtListener (Free Law Project), text of the opinion

Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor v. Construction and Marine Equipment Co., 928 F. Supp. 1388 (D.N.J. 1996)

The district court grants the Waterfront Commission a preliminary injunction against a company working as an unlicensed stevedore, and recounts the 1953 compact's purpose and Congress's consent in Public Law 83-252.

Date
1996-06-18
Kind
court-opinion
Source
CourtListener (Free Law Project), text of the opinion
Retrieved
2026-10-12
Docket
Civ. 95-3067 (WHW)
Rights
Opinion of a United States court. Works of the federal judiciary are in the public domain in the United States. The text was read on CourtListener.

United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Civil No. 95-3067 (WHW), Judge William H. Walls, June 18, 1996. “The Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor (‘Commission’) has applied for a preliminary injunction restraining Construction and Marine Equipment Co., Inc. (‘CME’) from performing certain activities that allegedly violate the Waterfront Commission Act.” The court granted it, barring the company from acting as a stevedore without a license, employing unregistered longshoremen and checkers, and using unlicensed pier superintendents or hiring agents.

Its background section summarizes why the compact was made: the hiring practices, kickbacks, gambling and usury that the 1953 findings describe, and Congress’s consent in Public Law 83-252, 67 Stat. 541, whose findings it quotes.

The case is a licensing dispute. It is filed here as the Commission’s later enforcement of the 1953 compact (67 Stat. 541), and makes no finding about organized crime.

itemWaterfront Commission Compact: 67 Stat. 541 (Public Law 252, Chapter 407), 12 August 1953The 1953 Act of Congress consenting to the New York-New Jersey Waterfront Commission Compact. In the compact's findings the two states declare that hiring on the Port of New York waterfront was marked by "corrupt hiring practices" by persons who "are frequently criminals."itemLinehan v. Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, 347 U.S. 439 (1954)The Supreme Court summarily affirms judgments upholding the Waterfront Commission Compact. Justices Douglas and Black dissent from the summary treatment and describe the compact's registration of longshoremen.itemDe Veau v. Braisted, 363 U.S. 144 (1960)The Supreme Court upheld § 8 of the New York Waterfront Commission Act of 1953, which barred a waterfront union from collecting dues while an officer convicted of a felony remained in office.itemMurphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, 378 U.S. 52 (1964)Witnesses at a Waterfront Commission hearing on a work stoppage at the Hoboken piers, granted state immunity, refuse to answer for fear of federal prosecution. The Supreme Court holds that the privilege against self-incrimination protects a state witness against incrimination under federal law.itemCarson v. Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, 73 F.3d 24 (3d Cir. 1995)The Third Circuit rejects a convicted International Longshoremen's Association officer's Supremacy Clause challenge to section 8 of the Waterfront Commission Act, holding the claim barred by De Veau v. Braisted.