Opinion of the Court — Stanfill v. Bremerton Metal Trades Council

This writing

Type: Opinion of the Court
Filed: June 25, 2002
Case: Stanfill v. Bremerton Metal Trades Council
Case status: Decided

Source No authoring judge could be established for this writing, either from provider metadata or from the signature line of the court's published opinion. Benchlight shows the gap rather than guessing at an author.

Opening text

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

*570 MEMORANDUM * This case involves alleged violations of the bill of rights portion of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (“LMRDA”), 29 U.S.C. § 411 , as well as alleged Lability for the state tort of outrage. Jackie Stanfill served as Alternate Safety Chair for Bremerton Metal Trades Council (“Bremerton Council”). After he was removed from that position, allegedly in retaliation for exercising his rights under 29 U.S.C. § 411 , Stanfill brought suit under 29 U.S.C. § 412 . The district court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants, after concluding that the LMRDA applied but that it was preempted by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (“CSRA”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 7101-7135 . Stanfill appeals, arguing that the LMRDA applies to defendants Bremerton Council and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 574 (“Local 574”), which is Stanfill’s local union, and that the LMRDA is not preempted. 1 Additionally, he argues that the CSRA does not preempt his state-law outrage claim. We conclude that the district court was correct that the LMRDA applies to defendant Bremerton Council. See Chao v. Bremerton Metal Trades Council, 294 F.3d 1114 , (9th Cir.2…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.