In the case of Local No. 438 Construction & General Laborers' Union, AFL-CIO v. Curry et al., the U.S Supreme Court addressed a dispute between a labor union and an employer over collective bargaining agreements. The union had filed suit against S.J. Curry & Co., alleging that they violated federal labor laws by refusing to abide by terms set in their agreement regarding wages, hours, and working conditions for employees who were members of the union. The company argued that it was not bound by these terms as they did not sign any formal contract with the union but only agreed verbally during negotiations. The court ruled in favor of the company stating that under Section 301(a) of Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA), there must be a written agreement signed by both parties for such disputes to be actionable under federal law; verbal agreements are insufficient grounds for legal action on violations alleged by unions against employers concerning collective bargaining provisions.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Local No. 438 Construction & General Laborers' Union, AFL-CIO v. Curry et al., Justice Douglas argued that a union should not be held liable for damages caused by a strike if it was acting in good faith to protect its members' interests and had no knowledge or reason to believe that their actions would result in damage to an innocent third party. He contended that holding unions financially responsible for such damages could potentially bankrupt them and thereby undermine their ability to effectively represent their members. Furthermore, he suggested that this ruling might discourage unions from taking collective action out of fear of potential financial repercussions, which would significantly weaken their bargaining power.