Document: 476 U.S. 380 106 S.Ct. 1904 90 L.Ed.2d 389 INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S ASSOCIATION, AFL-CIO, Appellantv.Larry DAVIS. No. 85-217. Argued Feb. 25, 1986. Decided May 27, Syllabus Appellee was formerly employed as a ship superintendent for stevedoring company. When he, with others, attempted to organize the company's superintendents and affiliate appellant Union, Union official allegedly assured them that union would get their jobs back if they were discharged participating in Union-related activities. After he apparently because of such activities, appellee filed suit against an Alabama Circuit Court, alleging fraud misrepresentation under statute. The case proceeded trial, jury entered verdict appellee's favor. Throughout defended on merits, not until its motion judgment notwithstanding did it claim Court lacked jurisdiction pre-empted by National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). denied verdict. Supreme affirmed, holding pre-emption waivable defense required be affirmatively pleaded law, since so pleaded, deemed waived. Held: 1. Court's had waived noncompliance state procedural rules governing affirmative defenses present independent adequate ground supporting court's judgment, court erred declining address merits. Pp. 387-393. 2. general standard determining whether proceedings are NLRA, i.e., conduct at issue arguably protected or prohibited San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon, 359 236, 79 773, 3 775 (1959), is applicable this case. Where law NLRA Garmon progeny, courts lack power adjudicate claims trigger pre-emption. Here, employee, rather than supervisor, should initially decided Board (NLRB), courts. Because turns status, appellant's must supported showing sufficient permit NLRB find employee. On record, has made no showing. mere conclusive determination status does make out arguable 394-399. 470 So.2d 1215 (Ala.1985), affirmed. WHITE, J., delivered opinion Part I which all other Members joined, II BURGER, C.J., BRENNAN, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, JJ., III Members, except joined. REHNQUIST, concurring part POWELL, STEVENS, O'CONNOR, post, p. 399. dissenting part, 403. Charles R. Goldburg, New York City, appellant. Bayless E. Biles, Bay Minette, Ala., appellee. Justice WHITE Court. 1 set forth when regulations provisions (NLRA Act), see 29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq. (1982 ed. Supp. II): Subject exception only limited circumstances, "[w]hen activity subject 7 8 [29 157 158], States well federal defer exclusive competence danger interference national policy averted." U.S., 245, S.Ct., 780. This been applied multitude cases again today. Before addressing question, however, we consider very nature pre-emption—whether asserted trial considered forever challenge may raised any time. 2 * Larry Davis Ryan-Walsh Stevedoring Co. Mobile, Alabama. At times relevant events gave rise suit, trainee superintendent. served immediate superiors longshoremen Ryan-Walsh. They salary, compensation generally lower received longshoremen, who worked hourly basis. In early 1981, Ben Trione, one Ryan-Walsh, contacted International Longshoremen's Association (ILA Union), represents employees waterfront, discuss possibility organizing affiliating Union. Although parties here dispute content conversations occurred stage between Trione ILA representatives regarding eligibility membership, undisputed meeting organized attended Benny Holland, from Houston, Texas. 4 meeting, several expressed fear being union-related According Davis' witnesses, Holland's response reassure backpay happened. manner determined supervisors know supervisors.1 Holland further testified submitted Union's lawyers definitive time meeting. according resulted number superintendents, including Davis, signing pledge cards charter application ILA.2 5 day following organizational fired Trione. ILA, supplied him attorney. attorney unfair labor practice charge Board, employee violated 8(a)(1) 8(a)(3) discharging See §§ 158(a)(1), (3).3 NLRB's Regional Director, supervisor declined complaint.4 not, right do, appeal General Counsel. CFR 102.19 (1985). Shortly thereafter, also his continued efforts join 6 discharge, Mobile County, Ala.Code 6-5-101 (1975).5 favor amount $75,000. raising NLRA. verdict, first over field "been preempted jurisdiction." App. 96a. without jury's Alabama, argued action Garmon. acknowledging adopted ILA's position nonwaivable,6 held "[i]t circuit matter damage tort even arises context labor-related dispute—that pre-empted. Rather, exercise preemption." 1215, 1216 view subject-matter ordinary damages. As defense, pleaded. Since waived.7 although waived, stated footnote occasion reach have found pre-emption: 9 "The instant facts fall squarely within 'peripheral concern' preemption disputes. 243-44 [79 778-79, 775] (1959). already employer's Management Act. Thus, case, [Davis] remedy before NLRB, dispute, somewhat labor-related, is, most, NLRB. See, e.g., Linn United Plant Guard Workers Local 114, 383 53 [86 657, 15 582] (1966)." Id., 1216-1217, n. (citations omitted). 10 accordingly affirmed appealed Court; moved dismiss decision below rested based rule. submission, substantial question reliance rule erroneous scope pre-emption, hence relied independent. We noted probable jurisdiction, 474 899, 224, 88 223 (1985).8 A. 11 Given presentation defenses, decide below. If does, our review end, authority determinations purely law. Nor do issues can effect judgment. Zacchini Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co., 433 562, 566, 97 2849, 2852, 965 (1977); Herb Pitcairn, 324 117, 125-126, 65 459, 462-463, 89 L.Ed. 789 (1945); Fox Film Corp. Muller, 296 207, 210, 56 183, 184, 80 158 (1935). inquiry into sufficiency ground, undertake ourselves. Michigan Long, 463 1032, 1038, 103 3469, 3474, 77 1201 (1983); Abie State Bank Bryan, 282 765, 51 252, 255, 75 690 (1931). 12 concluding procedurally barred, County simple misrepresentation, there could actual jurisdiction. Only 13 explanation certain logic it; but point gives particular controversies provided itself vesting controversy another body. It clearly Congress' powers establish forum area Congress regulate Constitution. Kalb Feuerstein, 308 433, 60 343, 84 370 (1940). Whether done specific answered party Such congressional intent boundaries character pre-empting enactment Pre-emption, practical manifestation Supremacy Clause, always question. 14 ruling implicates underlying judgment: "[W]hen resolution depends constitutional ruling, state-law prong precluded. . federal-law integral disposition matter, respect advisory." Ake Oklahoma, 68, 75, 105 1087, 1092, (1985) (citing supra, 126, 463; Enterprise Irrigation District Farmers Mutual Canal 243 157, 164, 37 318, 320, 61 644 (1917)). 16 To determine upon ascertain correctly resolved antecedent Specifically, otherwise timely nonwaivable foreclosure adjudicate. B 17 Garner Teamsters, 346 485, 490-491, 74 161, 165-166, 98 228 (1953), articulated what come accepted basis broadly pre-emptive NLRA: 18 "Congress merely lay down substantive enforced tribunal competent apply parties. went confide primary interpretation specially constituted prescribed procedure investigation, complaint notice, hearing decision, judicial relief pending final administrative order. evidently centralized administration designed procedures necessary obtain uniform avoid these diversities conflicts likely result variety local attitudes toward controversies. A multiplicity tribunals diversity quite apt produce incompatible conflicting adjudications different law." 19 cornerstone, now well-established NLRA's "complex interrelated scheme remedy, administration," 243, 778, "due regard requires yield," id., 244, 779, activities sought regulated fairly assumed purview 8. acknowledged "[a]t clear governed was, perhaps, outside both sections." Ibid. Even ambiguous situations, concluded "courts issues. essential left instance Board." 244-245, 779-780. Act, 20 Construction Laborers Curry, 371 542, 83 531, 514 (1963), principles situation Georgia awarded contained allegations "at least violation 8(b)." 546, 534. There, reviewed "the [the] Board," 543, 533, that, though authorized "clearly exceeded power" awarding complaint. 548, 535. injunction controversy, 546-547, 534-535. 21 That conclusion fact jurisdictional accentuated discussion arose. temporary only, permanent order yet issued. rejected, argument purposes own jurisdiction: 22 "[W]e believe rests solid ground. petitioner court, here, proceed controversy. ripe erroneously admittedly nor governs properly What finally asserting deal beyond instead domain 535 23 Belknap, Inc. Hale, 491, 497-498, 5, 3172, 3177-3178, 798 (1983). Curry proceeding regulation claimed choice-of-forum choice-of-law such, dispute. then extinguished.9 24 reiterated many pre-emption; reaffirmed decisions describing defining enacting intended area. Journeymen Borden, 373 690, 698, 1423, 1427, 638 (1963); Iron Perko, 701, 708, 1429, 1433, 646 Liner Jafco, Inc., 375 301, 309-310, 391, 396, 347 (1964); Workers, 53, 60, 86 661, 582 (1966); Vaca Sipes, 386 171, 179, 87 903, 910, 842 (1967); Motor Coach Employees Lockridge, 403 274, 285-291, 91 1909, 1917-1920, 473 (1971); Farmer Carpenters, 430 290, 296-297, 305, 1056, 1061-1062, 1066, 338 Sears, Roebuck & 436 180, 188-190, 1745, 1752-1754, 209 (1978); Operating Engineers Jones, 460 669, 676, 1453, 1458, 368 510-511, 3183-3184; Brown Hotel Employees, 468 502-503, 104 3179, 3185-3186, 82 (1984); Wisconsin Dept. Industry, Human Gould 475 282, 286, 1057, 1061, (1986). 25 seriously conclusion—at matter. He concedes, fact, "when placed will issue. cases, issued void ab initio pre-empted." Brief 13. notes, pre-empt "all touches concerns way complex interrelationships employees, employers, unions; obviously, much States." 289, 1919. points recognition some pre-empted: 26 "[D]ue presuppositions embracing system us withdrawal where peripheral concern Or touched interests deeply rooted feeling responsibility absence compelling direction, infer deprived act." 243-244, 778-779 27 Both identified exceptions. supra; Carpenters Automobile Russell, 356 634, 78 932, 1030 (1958); Machinists Gonzales, 617, 923, 1018 Youngdahl Rainfair, 355 131, 206, (1957); Laburnum Corp., 656, 833, 1025 (1954).10 But serve more precise demarcations redefined way. raised, court. Consequently, support entitled adjudication merits.11 28 line directs, clear. There legally fired,12 misspoke represented legal redress discharge practice, attempt interest err representing joining remedy. inquire, then, supervisor. precondition "arguably" prohibited, substance. satisfied conclusory assertion therefore claim, more, word mean anything, claiming demonstrate advance plainly contrary language "authoritatively rejected" Board. Marine Interlake S.S. 173, 1237, 1243, 418 (1962). put enough evidence enable reasonably uphold interpretation. therefore, Our examination record leads conclude carried burden 30 Expecting best foot forward look submission brief states liable 'the same fundamental respect.' " Appellant (quoting 682, 1462. So far, proceeds direction. critical asserts "[a]bsent applying making contention, relies indicating avoided individual's supervisory 'with unclouded significance.' Hanna Mining Engineers, 382 181, 190, 327, 332, 254 (1965) 246, 780). 680, 1460. duties makes show like those terms defined 2(1) (11) 152(1) (11).13 argue job Trione's Director wrong finding Its sole 31 cannot agree status. suggests how opportunity so. accept essentially equivalent allowing effectively eliminate necessity better carry ousted. 32 Moreover, neither supports union's position. source stated, 779: 33 "When purports constitute 8, due yield. leave free central aim involves too great conflict requirements imposed 34 Later said: competence" Of course, explained, might other, "absence Board's prohibited," 780, apparent passages decides entertain litigation. Nothing simply other. 35 nothing submission. there, relying Counsel adversely rested. Obviously, inference drawn involved negated after examining deciding "whether either [the organizations] 'labor organization' contemplation 178, 1239. hold while persuasive marine engineers supervisors, nevertheless organization meaning While agreeing announced Douglas dissented 36 devoid factual respect, similar post-trial Until motion, out, alleged information form belief was. moving summary directed close assert let alone claim.14 sum, met IV subsequent preemption. below, reject characterization prior renders reaffirm previously affirm 38 ordered. 39 whom O'CONNOR join, 40 holds merits never once adverse By defendant save sees poses threat orderly justified mandated result. result, disagree opinion. 41 sued misrepresentation. employ Mobile. theoretically superior paid less salary wages. 42 One fellow about possibility, Testimony indicated representative, discharged. signed ILA. 43 Sure enough, succeed getting back, backpay. throughout trial; returned point, raise technique sanctions. 44 refused observing Courts having try, inter alia, involving Rules Civil Procedure, considered. could, wished, forbid impose rule, am convinced thing. 45 considers provide explicitly mortgage petition bankruptcy 46 '(o) Except granted judge report conciliation commissioner, shall instituted, instituted filing section, maintained, otherwise, farmer property, confirmation composition extension proposal court: 47 48 '(2) land recovery possession land.' 440-441, 346-347 Frazier-Lemke Act) (emphasis deleted). 49 contrast, said state-court long beginning enunciated doctrine relations implied Congress. Garner. 50 pointed leaves states, refrained telling much. spell indications still permissible." 488, 164 (footnote Thus speaks "subject-matter jurisdiction" rely far dimly refracted version Court: said, thinks confronted situation. thin reed perverse 52 places undue (1963). presented every proceedings. direct Georgia, "within refers "jurisdiction," Frankfurter term 'jurisdiction' verbal coat colors." Tucker Truck Lines, 344 33, 39, 73 67, 70, 54 (1952) (dissenting opinion). today implicitly "jurisdiction" Bombycilla cedrorum (cedar waxwing) ornithologists: description species recognized world. partake specialized meaning. certainly Kalb, foreordains State-court judges experts primarily Indeed, advancing march legislation areas heretofore impossible task judge—federal state—to keep abreast various Here neutral statute counterpart Federal wishes wait gone saying allows sophisticated gamble obtaining favorable loses me defies common sense; ordained it, albeit reluctance. Congress, mistaken doing so, Having "jurisdictional," time, goes With agree. Accordingly, Parts concur 55 part. reaffirms cause action, Ante, 393. fully agree, vel non erroneous, odds policies dissent 57 779. stay hand. "[W]hether decided" Taggart Weinacker's, 397 223, 229, 876, 879, 240 (1970) (separate memorandum Harlan, J.) added). follow nonetheless "claiming ousted," ante, require "sufficient supervisor." 395. transforming notion requirement "arguable case," seems misses today, guise weighing evidence, precisely make. 58 understand strays congressionally broad doctrine. Under prohibited; regulation, unregulated authorities. falls sphere crucial easy actually "confide[d] tribunal," thereby ensuring administered uniformly wisdom insight resulting expertise experience. 490, 165, quoted 242, 778.1 Permitting unlawful embrace lawful. 59 garner holding, misplaced. recognizing definition "labor organization," "supervisor," "of kind most wisely entrusted agency charged day-to-day whole." 1241. Interlake, statutory organization." dicta, presented. up benchmark successfully protected; protected: "This shown depended" 1243.2 62 Board; take hands 63 underscores signal merit Garmon.3 fired, reinstatement. ability reinstatement protect retaliatory actions employer cognizable intentional However, committed firing him, rubric "arguably"—the supervisor.4 64 identifying "aging persistently vexing problem." Security Service, 384 F.2d 143, 145 (CA5 1967). Supervisory inherently fact-specific duties, title classification. Winco Petroleum 241 N.L.R.B. 1118 (1979) (giving "supervisor" theoretical perform functions convert rank-and-file supervisor); Pattern Makers Assn., 199 96 (1972) (shop foreman tools 40% despite contract persons work trade). difficulty assessing individual, need uniformity laws, (1965), individuals "has settled significance."5 332. "advance[d] 'authoritatively rejected' 1914, quoting 1243. Garmon.6 66 2(11) Stat. 138, follows: 'supervisor' means individual authority, employer, hire, transfer, suspend, off, recall, promote, assign, reward, discipline responsibly them, adjust grievances, recommend connection foregoing routine clerical nature, use judgment." 152(11). Supervisors section expressly 2(3) 152(3). 2(3), given rights 140, provides: "Employees self-organization, form, assist organizations, bargain collectively through choosing, engage concerted purpose collective bargaining mutual aid protection, refrain extent affected agreement requiring membership condition employment 8(a)(3)." Apparently, insufficient obtained, 159(a), representation Section 8(a) 452, turn, provides part: "It employer— "(1) interfere with, restrain, coerce guaranteed 7. "(3) discrimination hire tenure encourage discourage organization. ." (3). commit fires reasons: An "is liberty demand absolute loyalty personnel insisting, pain participate in, retain union." Florida Power Light Electrical 417 790, 812, 94 2737, 2748, 477 (1974). 671, 1, 1456, Beasley Food Fair North Carolina, 416 653, 656-657, 2023, 2025-2026, 443 may, allow union. Light, 808, 813, 2748. covered infringes nonsupervisory employees. Parker-Robb Chevrolet, 262 402 (1982), aff'd Salesmen's 1095 229 U.S.App.D.C. 105, 711 (1983) (summarizing post-1982 violations disciplinary taken supervisors). complaint, conclusions "As appears [of Act] warranted inasmuch disclosed Mr. For reason, 'supervisors' specifically excluded am, refusing matter." 62a-63a. "Misrepresentations material willfully deceive, recklessly knowledge, acted opposite party, mistake innocently fraud." Consolidated Theatres, Theatrical Stage 16, 69 Cal.2d 713, Cal.Rptr. 213, 447 P.2d 325 (1968). reaching conclusion, Rule Procedure 8(c) listed "it obviously listed." So.2d, 1216, Powell Phenix Savings Loan 434 247 (Ala.1983) (holding pleaded). Assuming, infra, rest proper 1257(2), upheld statute, 6-5-101, applied, note derives delineated decisions. go State's adjudicatory regulatory opposed laws. depend injured bringing (1978). 325-332, 1937-1940, (1971) (WHITE, dissenting); Longshoremen Ariadne Shipping 195, 201-202, 872, 875-876, 218 concurring). reasoning faced strikingly appellants. appellants concurrently rejected invalid default. face appellees' default nonfederal appellants' contention "oust[ed] court" during pendency proceeding. thus "was court's] power, void, collateral attack." 438, 346. bankruptcy, vest exclusively withdraw forums, right. longstanding respects Kalb. Based interstate commerce, created body laws vested And, exclusivity Enactment must, operation entity chosen administer judicial, alter allegation assuming aimed Ryan-Walsh's interfered employees' rights. 4, supra. her 1118, 101 LRRM 1100 (1979). sua sponte search colorable whose concurrence initial hesitancy categorical treatment claims, came approach, review, monitor raised: "Nor case-by-case each pronouncement thought to, policy. ill-equipped play role dictates problem solved capable relatively application, largely police themselves regard." 289-290, 1919-1920, (1971). Similarly, unions pending, indication "arguably," create case" supplied), 182, 1242, consistently advanced organizations sure, universe imperfection. "arguably protected" coverage 1936-1940 201, 875, (1978), addressed heart WHITE's opposition protected." broader protected," expand Sears encompass Apparently seeking unable directly, establishes nearly effective. HARLAN, speaking Lockridge responding weaken answer today: "[A]lthough making, finds basic justification presumed imperfection, think founded reasoned principle altered insights born experience heavy would, late date, ask abandon quest perfect." 302, 1925. bar threshold, usually dismiss. called developed discovery occurred. difficult required, today's fair reading complained lacks 534, indeed cloud "ship superintendent," performs workers "walking foremen" Tex. advised Houston walking foremen formed collective-bargaining agreement. Juris. Statement 3. establishing new standard, joined four Justices These defense. 386, 7, 388-389, ineluctably leading Rather stating want

Category: 8