Opinion ID: 1204339
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: labor act preemption

Text: The defendants also argue that the superior court lacked jurisdiction because the respondents' claim is actually one which is governed exclusively by section 411(a)(1) of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 401-531. Section 411(a)(1) addresses voting procedures within labor organizations. [6] We disagree that the Act preempts state remedies. Section 413 of the Act expressly preserves state remedies: Nothing contained in this subchapter shall limit the rights and remedies of any member of a labor organization under any state or federal law or before any court or other tribunal, or under the constitution and bylaws of any labor organization. Courts [7] and commentators [8] agree that this section allows plaintiffs to choose between federal and state remedies. In conclusion, neither ERISA nor the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act preclude state court jurisdiction in this case. The trial court's decision is AFFIRMED.