Upon motion of the international union, service was quashed upon the ground that service upon an officer of the local did not constitute service upon the international organization. Authority is in accord with this ruling. Singleton v. Order of Railway Conductors of America (1935, Dist. Ct. S.D., Ill., N.D.), 9 F. Supp. 417; Christian v. International Association of Machinists (1925, Dist.Ct., Ky.), 7 F.2d 481; Dean v. International Longshoremen's Ass'n (1936, Dist.Ct., W.D., La.), 17 F. Supp. 748; Kelley v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen (1950, Dist.Ct., W.D., Mo., W.D.), 90 F. Supp. 925; Daily Review Corp. v. International Typographical Union (1949, Dist.Ct., N.Y.), 9 F.R.D. 295; Isbrandtsen Co., Inc. v. National Marine Engineers' Ben. Ass'n (1949, Dist.Ct., N.Y.), 9 F.R.D. 541, 544; McFarland v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen (1939, La.), 190 So. 573, 193 La. 337; Hurley v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen (1946, Neb.), 25 N.W.2d 29, 147 Neb. 781; Amon v. Moreschi (1947, N Y), 296 N.Y. 395, 73 N.E.2d 716; Western Union Telegraph Co., Petition of (1954, N.Y.), 206 Misc. 561, 133 N.Y.S.2d 371; United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America v. McMurtrey (1937, Okla.), 179 Okla. 575, 66 P.2d 1051; International Brotherhood of Boilermakers v. Wood (1934, Va.), 162 Va. 517, 175 S.E. 45. As expressed in the Isbrandtsen Company case [ 9 F.R.D. 544], "The national and local are autonomous entities and therefore service of process on the one is not valid se
Whether in light of the other evidence presented in Morgan Drive Away, we might have been constrained to affirm a finding by the District Court that there was no agency relationship, we need not consider. Farnsworth Chambers Co. v. Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local 49, D.C.N.Mex., 125 F. Supp. 830; Isbrandtsen Co., Inc. v. National Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association, D.C.S.D.N.Y., 9 F.R.D. 541; Dean v. International Longshoremen's Association, D.C.W.D.La., 17 F. Supp. 748; Singleton v. Order of Railway Conductors of America, D.C.S.D.Ill., 9 F. Supp. 417; Christian v. International Association of Machinists, D.C.E.D.Ky., 7 F.2d 481. In this case, there was also evidence that Local No. 55 was in trusteeship, under the immediate, direct control of the International, the trustee being an official in International's Washington office and Rutledge his appointed agent.
The record does not disclose the reason why service was not had on one of the officers of the defendant corporation or, in their absence, on one of the officers of the Local. But even if such showing had been made, we are of opinion that the character of Angerholzer's relation to the defendant corporation was not such that he could be deemed its "business agent" or "agent transacting business" for it in the State of Florida. Cf. Operative Plasterer's, etc., Ass'n v. Case, 68 App.D.C. 43, CA DC, 93 F.2d 56; Dean v. International Longshoremen's Ass'n, D.C., 17 F. Supp. 748; Singleton v. Order RR Conductors, D.C., 9 F. Supp. 417. Appellee seemingly places some reliance on Florida Statutes '49, Section 447.11, F.S.A. We think this statute clearly has reference to actions commenced by or against unincorporated labor organizations and that it has no applicability to the defendant corporation.
St. Germain v. Bakery Confectionery Union, 1917, 97 Wn. 282, 166 P. 665, L.R.A. 1917F, 824. Dean v. International Longshoremen's Ass'n, 1936, D.C.W.D.La., 17 F. Supp. 748. United Mine Workers of America v. Coronado Coal Co., 259 U.S. 344, 387, 42 S.Ct. 570, 66 L.Ed. 975, 27 A.L.R. 762; Jardine v. Superior Court, supra.
' Cf. Taylor v. Order of Railway Conductors, 1903, 89 Minn. 222, 94 N.W. 684; Jardine v. Superior Court in and for Los Angeles County, 1931, 213 Cal. 301, 2 P.2d 756, 79 A.L.R. 291; Fitzpatrick v. International Typographical Union of North America, 1921, 149 Minn. 401, 184 N.W. 17; and, United States Heater Co. v. Iron Molders' Union of North America, 1902, 129 Mich. 354, 88 N.W. 889. Distinguish Dean v. International Longshoremen's Ass'n, D.C.La.1936, 17 F.Supp. 748, wherein no state statute was in view. International's motion to quash is hereby overruled; and, International is given twenty days in which to answer.
Pascale et al. v. Emery et al., 95 F. Supp. 147 (D.C., Mass., 1951), held service sufficient when made upon a business agent of the Local who was also District President and member of the International's administrative committee. Service upon the President of the Local was held insufficient to hold the International in Dailey Review Corporation v. International Typographical Union et al., 9 F.R.D. 295 (D.C., E. D. N.Y., 1949); and Dean v. International Longshoremen'sAss'n et al., 17 F. Supp. 748 (D.C., W. D. La., 1936); as was service upon the chairman of the Local, Christian v. International Ass'n of Machinists et al., 7 F.2d 481 (D.C., E. D. Ky., 1925); upon the General Chairman of a General Grievance Committee, Kelley v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, 90 F. Supp. 925 (D.C., W. D. Mo., 1950); upon the Secretary-Treasurer of the Local, Singleton et al. v. Order of Railway Conductors of America et al., 9 F. Supp. 417 (D.C., S.D. Ill., 1935); and upon the Assistant Business Manager of the Local, Isbrandtsen Co., Inc. v. National Marine Engineers' Beneficial Ass'n., 9 F. R. D. 541 (D.C., S.D. N.Y., 1949). The decisions of our sister States have for the most part held that service effectuated within the State upon one whose relationship to the International was such that it would be reasonable to expect that notice would reach the International, was valid whether the one served be a person designated by the International to engage in organizational activity in a local area or if he be merely an of
Judgment affirmed. Messrs. Osborne, Butler Moore, of Spartanburg, forAppellant, Order of Railway Conductors of America, cite: As to a motion to quash service raising a question of law: 173 S.C. 527, 176 S.E. 711. As to the status of a voluntaryunincorporated non-profit association, in litigation,under the laws of South Carolina: 132 S.C. 498, 129 S.E. 830; 186 N.C. 504, 120 S.E. 57; 93 S.C. 414, 77 S.E. 59; 181 S.C. 84, 186 S.E. 651; 193 S.C. 205, 8 S.E.2d 344; 124 S.C. 19, 115 S.E. 900, 904; 116 S.C. 263, 108 S.E. 107. As to an officer of a local Division of avoluntary unincorporated non-profit association being notan agent for the service of process on the parent association: 172 S.C. 415, 428, 174 S.E. 385; 9 F. Supp. 417; 7 F.2d 481; 17 F. Supp. 748; 259 U.S. 344, 42 S.Ct. 570, 66 L.Ed. 975, 27 A.L.R. 762; 175 S.E. 45; 193 La. 337, 190 So. 573; 125 Conn. 490, 7 A.2d 448; (Okla.) 66 P.2d 105; 186 N.C. 504, 120 S.E. 57. As to noliability being created simply by virtue of membership, butauthorization of the creation of the liability must be shown: 132 S.C. 498, 129 S.E. 830; 193 S.C. 205, 8 S.E.2d 344; 116 S.C. 263, 108 S.E. 107; 31 Am. Jur. 980, 982; 219 Fed. 719, 720; 137 S.E. 654. As tothe Constitution and By-Laws of the Association beingthe sole evidence of authority to bind such an Associationas the appellant here: 5 C.J. 1349, Sec. 53; 162 S.C. 29, 159 S.E. 914; 98 S.E. 580; 5 C.J. 1347, Sec. 46; 5 C.J. 1345, Sec. 38. As to the limitation on theliability of an Association for the wrongful or tortiousacts of a person, where such person is not under thecontrol of the Association: 4 Am. Jur. 484, Sec. 43, 44; 31 Am. Jur. 980, Sec. 296, 297; 137 S.E. 654; 219 Fed. 719; 283 Fed. 557; 273 Fed. 48; 259 U.S. 344, 66 L.Ed. 975, 42 S.Ct
A local Union and an international Union as unincorporated associations are separate and distinct entities, and since suit eo nomine may be separately brought against or by either, they are separate juridical entities. United Mine Workers v. Coronado Coal Co., 259 U.S. 344, 42 S.Ct. 570, 66 L.Ed. 975, 27 A.L.R. 762; United Brotherhood v. United States, 330 U.S. 395, 67 S.Ct. 775; Textile Workers Union v. Federal. Labor Union, 240 Ala. 239, 198 So. 606, 131 A.L.R. 896; Christian v. International Ass'n of Machinists, D.C., 7 F.2d 481; Dean v. International Longshoremen's Ass'n, D.C., 17 F. Supp. 748; Singleton v. Order of Railway Conductors, D.C., 9 F. Supp. 417; McFarland v. Brotherhood of L. F. E., 193 La. 337, 190 So. 573; International Union v. Industrial Comm., 248 Wis. 364, 21 N.W.2d 711. The C. I. O. is a separate juridical entity from a local union afflicted with one of the autonomous unions in turn afflicted with C. I. O. The latter's residence is at its headquarters in Washington, D.C. Cf. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Cook, Tex.Civ.App., 221 S.W. 1049. It is not within the purview of Code 1940, Tit. 7, ยง 144. Grand International B. of L. E. v. Green, 206 Ala. 196, 89 So. 435; In re Nor. Va. Broadcasters, etc., N.L.R.B. Cas. No. 5-R-3049, Lab. Law Rep. Oct. 1947; Van Landingham v. Alabama G. S. R. Co., 243 Ala. 31, 8 So.2d 266. Since there has been no service upon any individual or association with capacity to accept service as agent or representative of C. I. O., it has not been duly brought within the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court by service of process. McF
" In the case of Dean v. International Longshoremen's Association, 17 F. Supp. 748, a case before Judge Dawkins in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, it is stated: "This is a suit at law against the International Longshoremen's Association (hereinafter referred to as International), Locals Nos. 1214 and 1180, of said association, and certain individual officers and members of said locals, for damages alleged to have been caused by defendants' violation of the Clayton Anti-Trust Act (38 Stat. 730), in that they all combined and conspired to interfere with and did interfere and prevent the operation of plaintiff's barge line in interstate commerce.