Document: 430 U.S. 290 97 S.Ct. 1056 51 L.Ed.2d 338 Joy A. FARMER, Special Administrator, Petitioner,v.UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS AMERICA, LOCAL 25, et al. No. 75-804. Argued Nov. 8, 1976. Decided March 7, 1977. Syllabus A member and officer (petitioner's decedent) of respondent local carpenters' union brought a tort action for damages in California state court against Unions Union officials, alleging count two the complaint that, because sharp disagreement between him officials over various internal Policies, respondents had intentionally engaged outrageous conduct, threats, intimidation, thereby caused to suffer emotional distress resulting bodily injury; other counts that discriminated referrals employment its hiring hall his dissendent intra-union political activities, breached provisions collective-bargaining agreement with contractors association by failing refer on nondiscriminatory basis, such failure comply also membership contract Union. The trial sustained demurrer allegations discrimination breach ground federal law pre-empted jurisdiction them, but allowed case go two. jury returned verdict actual punitive plaintiff, entered judgment verdict. Court Appeal reversed, holding courts no since 'crux' concerned relations involved conduct arguably subject National Labor Relations Board's jurisdiction. Held: 1. Act does not pre-empt intentional infliction distress. Pp. 295-306. (a) No provision NLRA protects 'outrageous conduct' complained two, regardless whether operation was lawful or unlawful under statutes, there is protection officers' so 'no reasonable man civilized society should be expected endure it.' Hence, permitting exercise complaints result regulation federally protected conduct. 301-302. (b) State, hand, has substantial interest protecting citizens from kind abuse which plaintiff complained, less worthy recognition it concerns rather than physical injury damage reputation. 302-303. (c) Viewed light discrete scheme labor law, potential interference cause insufficient counterbalance legitimate State citizens, can resolved without reference any accommodation special interests unions members context. 304-305. (d) To permit concurrent state-court essential either unrelated function particularly abusive manner accomplished threatened itself. P. 305. 2. It clear record claim did meet above standards, evidence supporting focuses alleged discrimination; hence consequent risk represented instances precludes reinstatement court's judgment. 306. 49 Cal.App.3d 614, 122 Cal.Rptr. 722, vacated remanded. G. Dana Hobart, Los Angeles, Cal., petitioner. Leo Geffner, respondents. Norton J. Come, Washington, D. C., N. L. R. B., as amicus curiae, leave Court. Mr. Justice POWELL delivered opinion 1 issue this Act, amended, pre-empts recover 2 * Petitioner Richard T. Hill1 carpenter Local 25 United Brotherhood Carpenters Joiners America. (Union) operates an exclusive referral carpenters Angeles area. In 1965, Hill elected three-year term vice president Shortly thereafter developed Business Agent, Earl Daley, policies. According Hill, then began discriminate employers, prompting complain about within District Council International claims these he subjected campaign personal harassment addition continued hall.2 3 April 1969 petitioner filed Superior County Union, affiliated, certain including Agent Daley. amended complaint, defendants grievous injury. three counts, dissident intra-Union constituted He sought $500,000 actual, punitive, damages. 4 two.3 attempted prove Union's included 'frequent public ridicule,' 'incessant verbal abuse,' refusals jobs accordance rules hall. countered operated manner. instructed order preponderance severe defined 'any highly unpleasant mental reaction fright, grief, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, anger, chagrin, disappointment, worr(y).' 'severe,' context meant 5 'substantial enduring, distinguished trivial transitory. must quantity enduring quality it. Liability extend mere insults, indignities, annoyances, petty trivialities.' 6 Board would have compensate injuries distress, pain suffering, medical expenses, nor authority award refused give requested instruction effect could consider regarding respect opportunities procedures. 7 $7,500 $175,000 Council, verdict.4 8 reversed. 722. Relying Court's decisions Motor Coach Employees v. Lockridge, 403 274, 91 1909, 29 473 (1971); Plumbers Borden, 373 690, 83 1423, 10 638 (1963); Iron Workers Perko, 701, 1429, 646 San Diego Bldg. Trades Garmon, 359 236, 79 773, 775 (1959), held Board. remanded 'with instructions render dismiss action.' Cal.App.3d, at 631, Cal.Rptr., 732. Supreme denied review. 9 We granted certiorari applicability pre-emption doctrine cases nature, 423 1086, 96 876, 47 (1976). For reasons set forth below we vacate remand further proceedings. II been shaped primarily competing interests.5 On one recognized 'the broad powers conferred Congress upon interpret enforce complex Management . necessarily imply potentially conflicting 'rules remedy, administration' cannot permitted operate.' Vaca Sipes, 386 171, 178-179, 87 903, 910, 17 842 (1967), quoting supra, 242, S.Ct., 778. refrained providing specific directions scope regulation, unwilling 'declare all touches way interrelationships employees, ..' 289, 1919. Judicial experience numerous approaches problem area eventually led general rule 244, 779, recently reaffirmed both 291, 1920, Machinists Wisconsin Emp. Rel. Comm'n, 427 132, 138-139, 2548, 2552, 396 (1976): 11 'When may fairly assumed activities purports regulate are § constitute unfair practice due regard enactment requires yield. States free plainly central aim involves too great danger conflict power asserted requirements imposed law.' U.S., 779.6 12 But same considerations underlie Garmon recognize exceptions appropriate classes cases.7 apply activity otherwise fall if 'was merely peripheral concern (or) touched deeply rooted feeling responsibility absence compelling congressional direction, infer deprived act.' Id., 243-244, 779. See, e. g., Linn Plant Guard Workers, 383 53, 86 657, 15 582 (1966) (malicious libel); Automobile Russell, 356 634, 78 932, 1030 (1958) (mass picketing threats violence); Gonzales, 617, 923, 1018 (wrongful expulsion membership). 'where particular invoked before another tribunal structured administered virtually instances, safe presume judicial supervision will disserve promoted statutes.' 297-298, 1923. See supra (duty fair representation cases).8 13 These 'in undermine vitality rule.' 180, 911. contrary, they highlight our determine examining regulating question regulatory scheme. 14 nature inquiry perhaps best illustrated supra. Linn, assistant manager Pinkerton's Detective Agency, diversity union, officers, Pinkerton employee, circulated defamatory statement violation law. If charges filed, might found violated circulating false statements during organizational campaign, issuance malicious significant require election aside. Under formalistic application libel suit pre-empted. number factors influenced depart rule. First, noted underlying circulation material known 61, 662, thus proceed intended protect. Second, "an overriding interest" residents libels, "deeply responsibility." 62, 663. Third, reasoned little interfere effective administration national policy. proceeding focus only were misleading coercive; relevance performance functions. 63, Moreover, lack provide defamed individual relief. Ibid. Conversely, state-law unconcerned coercive context, event relief defamatory. Taken together, justified exception 16 careful, however, limit exception. minimize possibility suits dampen discussion characteristic disputes become weapon economic coercion, adopted analogy standards enunciated New York Times Co. Sullivan, 376 254, 84 710, 686 (1964), actions escape limited published knowledge reckless disregard their falsity. complainant proof injury, reputation, alienation associates, items pecuniary loss, form harm stressed judge assure excessive. Similar reasoning underlies involving violent tortious activity. Nothing statutes immunizes violence threat dispute, 640, 935; id., 649, 941 (Warren, C. J., dissenting); Constr. Laburnum Construction Corp., 347 656, 666, 74 833, 838, 98 L.Ed. 1025 (1954), fetter rights NLRA. consistently historic 'such traditionally matters safety use streets highways.' Allen-Bradley Bd., 315 740, 749, 62 820, 825, 1154 (1942). And, defamation preserved redress consistent scheme: Such adjudicated merits controversy. dissenting). 18 Although like Russell involve principles incidental occurring course well settled sufficient exempt pre-emption. '(I)t (has not) mattered acted through laws specifically directed towards governance industrial relations.'9 Instead, reflect balanced into regulation. As said 911, 'demonstrate decision given class depend being policies administrative remedies.'10 III 19 see 293, words' 'grievous damage.' Hill's referrals, basis rigid support conclusion entire preempted Our indicate, inflexible avoided, especially where State's threaten undue With conclude lie 20 second complaint. Regardless part officers 294. Thus, (1966), 21 complained. That Linn. comparatively recent development W. Prosser, Law Torts, 12, pp. 49-50, 56 (4th ed. 1971), based rested history issue, health well-being citizens. 22 There is, sure, some touch primary concern. itself highlights risk. those dismissed, violations contract. allegations, sufficiently supported Board, make out practice11 considered them Act.12 Even made 'job-dispatching procedures' 'work assignments' which, standing alone, occurrence concerned, prohibited suggests 23 Viewed, pay dues. n. 11, Whether play role disposition case, pain, expenses. resolution 'merits' dispute. Recovery defendant causing sustain Rubbish Collectors Assn. Siliznoff, 38 Cal.2d 330, 240 P.2d 282 (1952); Alcorn Anbro Engineering, Inc., Cal.3d 493, 88, 468 216 (1970). need consider, much resolve, employee terms opportunities. 24 balance, oust case. At time, reiterate realistic 'outrageous' based; hold principle. Nor suffice threat, actuality, considerable anxiety. something more required permitted. Simply stated, itself.13 Two limitations deserve emphasis. rests understanding permits recovery intolerable recoveries type robust language clash strong personalities commonplace contexts. repeat awarded 65-66, 664. IV 26 petitioner's accord discussed above. favor harassment, ridicule, abuse, discriminatory refusal dispatch briefest least desirable jobs;14 distinguishing categories jury. 13, 27 vacated, proceedings inconsistent opinion.15 28 ordered. died after petition writ granted. June 1, 1976, Farmer, administrator estate, substituted removing name top out-of-work list placing bottom, referring short duration when work available, qualified. appeal ruling sustaining contract, occasion counts. voluntarily dismissed official, officials. '(I)n NLRA, care taken distinguish predominantly ., although often easily separable.' Railroad Trainmen Jacksonville Terminal co., 394 369, 19, 89 1109, 1118, 344 (1969). branch most applicable instant garmon summarized 290-291, 1919-1920, 2552. '(W)e (cannot) case-by-case each final pronouncement does, reasonably thought to, relevant This ill-equipped system dictates solved capable relatively easy application, lower largely police themselves regard.' 289-290, judicially referred text, created cases. Section 303 1947, 61 Stat. 158, U.S.C. 187, authorizes anyone injured business property violative 8(b)(4) 140, 158(b)(4), district even though practices remediable Teamsters Morton, 377 252, 1253, 280 (1964). 301 LMRA, 185, Smith Evening News Assn., 371 195, 267, 246 (1962). 14(c)(2) added Title VII, 701(a) Labor-Management Reporting Disclosure 1959, 73 541, 164(c)(2), agencies assert 'labor declines, pursuant paragraph (1) subsection, jurisdiction.' (1963), example, sued hall, claiming arbitrarily occasion. union's right promise, implicit arrangement unfairly deny work. circumstances, impaired significantly functioning system. concluded Borden practice, NLRB, 365 667, 81 835, (1961). approval meaningless declare procedures contractual union. Accordingly, Garmon. prompted companion (1963). (1958), established preemption constitution bylaws seeking restoration illegal expulsion. Gonzales decided prior adoption current test, Lockridge makes full-blown rationale survive Garmon.' 295, 1922. stated 'Garmon, cast doubt reached Gonzales,' 1922, cited example nonapplicability normal regulated Act.' 243, extensive criticism, see, g. Bryson, Matter Wooden Logic: Preemption Individual Rights, Texas L.Rev. 1037, 1050-1058 (1973); Cox, Revisited, 85 Harv.L.Rev. 1337, 1368-1377 (1972), presents us reconsider relationship Gonzales. Whatever analysis used framework text 'real immediate' scheme, 296, whereas 'would directly consciously implicate law' 'at tangential remote.' Discrimination constitutes §§ 8(b)(1)(A) 8(b)(2) Radio Officers 17, 323, 455 (1954); Operating Engineers 18, 205 N.L.R.B. 901 (1973), enf'd, 500 F.2d 48 (CA6 1974). Prior filing suit, charge instance discrimination. refusing honor employer's request construction job. $2,517 backpay. therefore determination entrusted obligation depends breach. 292-297, 298-301, 1920-1923, 1925. Casting insulate doctrine. 9, Allegations employer stand different ground, since, earlier, view sensitive jury's exposure sort. Where necessary establish arose, instruct fact (as attendant law) enter liability Almost section brief summarizing transcript, Brief 4-10, counsel petitioner, who counsel, indicated oral argument emotion distress: 'We show simply issues jury: one, what (hiring hall) were; applied.' Tr. Oral Arg. 69. plain elements Respondents concede '(t)he plaintiff's sound distress,' contend dominant adduced referrals. 28. We, course, express aspects amount 'that endure.'

Category: 9