Document: 517 U.S. 544116 S.Ct. 1529134 L.Ed.2d 758 UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS UNION LOCAL 751v.BROWN GROUP, INC., DBA BROWN SHOE CO.Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for Eighth Circuit. No. 95-340. Supreme Argued February 20, 1996 Decided May 13, Syllabus* Petitioner union filed this suit, alleging that respondent company began lay off workers in connection with closing one its plants before giving notice required by Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (the WARN Act), seeking backpay each affected members. The District dismissed complaint, affirmed, holding suit was barred because failed meet third part test determining associational standing. Held: 1. grants a authority sue damages on behalf members, North Star Steel Co. v. Thomas, 515 U. S. ___, ___; writ certiorari therefore not improvidently granted. Pp. 3-6. 2. has standing bring action. 6-15. (a) Under modern doctrine, an organization may redress members' injuries when: "(a) members would otherwise have their own right; (b) interests it seeks protect are germane organization's purpose; (c) neither claim asserted nor relief requested requires participation individual lawsuit." Hunt Washington State Apple Advertising Comm'n, 432 333, 343. requirement been understood preclude when question here is whether bar union's found prong constitutional absolute, or prudential malleable Congress. apparently concluded test's character, denied even though permits damages. 6-10. first grounded Article III as element case controversy requirement. Resort general principles, however, leads conclusion impediment Congress abrogate. Hunt's suing representative include at least member present, his her right, pleaded association necessity association's suit. second complementary first, raises assurance litigators will themselves stake resolution dispute, thus be position serve defendant's natural adversary. But once satisfied prongs assuring adversarial vigor pursuing which exists, difficult see anything more. best seen focusing matters administrative convenience efficiency, elements controversy. Circumstantial evidence prong's nature wide variety other contexts statute, federal rule, accepted common-law practice person another, where sought. See, , 42 C. Section(s) 2000e-5(f)(1). 10-15. 50 F. 3d 1426, reversed remanded. Souter, J., delivered opinion unanimous Court. Justice Souter 1 102 Stat. 890, 29 2101 ., obligates certain employers give 60 days' plant mass layoff. If employer fails notice, employees day violation, and, alternative, ostensibly authorized behalf. See ___ (1995); Part II, . 2 Permitting under employee-members In 333 (1977), we described three-prong based injury element, issue here, such "the [or] Relying Warth Seldin, 422 490 (1975), held "individual participation" normally necessary prospective injunctive but indicated action suggesting running solely want sue. Hunt, 3 questions presented whether, enacting Act, intended abrogate applicable limitation so permit workers, if did, had do so. We answer yes question. 4 * On January 17, 1992, Brown Shoe Company wrote Food Commercial Workers International Union, stating shut down Dixon, Missouri, permanently 277 beginning March 1992. App. 62-63. complaint petitioner Union Local 751 charged Shoe's representations were false insofar they relevant fact, sending letter, begun layoffs, continued through into March. App 8-9.1 accordingly claimed violation sought statutory remedy 60-days' 5 Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 12(b)(6), saying "when recover monetary courts claims necessarily require suit." 820 Supp. 1192, 1193-1194 (ED Mo. 1993). Circuit concluding "[e]ach who wishes from must participate right can determined quantum calculated court basis particularized proof. Therefore, cannot precluded asserting standing." 1432 (1995).2 granted certiorari, 516 (1995), now reverse. II 6 At outset, argues no Because (whether alter enquiry) assumes does grant authority, urges us declare Steel, noted, contrary position, "[t]he class plaintiffs" "includes aggrieved (or unions, representatives)." S., (slip op., 2), further consideration doubt reading statute correctly. 7 key 2102, prohibits ordering "a layoff until end 60-day period" date employer's written "(1) time or, there time, employee," "(2) dislocated worker unit chief elected official local government within occur." 2102(a). defined "representative" 2102(a)(1) refers employees' union, "an exclusive meaning section 9(a) 8(f) National Labor Relations (29 159(a), 158(f)) Railway (45 152)." 2101(a)(4). 8 Enforcement 2102 addressed 2104(a), following provisions argument. Section 2104(a)(1) makes violating liable "each employee" benefits violation.3 2104(a)(5) provides "[a] enforce liability, including paragraph (1) either persons similarly situated, both [in appropriate district court]." Since "representative aggrieved," "persons situated" order "enforce liability." "[S]uch liability" refer liability 2104, since remedies exclusive. 2104(b). provision itself, any "such (so far concerns here) employee-members, long purposes Act. believe understood, failure timely notice. 9 alternative construction unconvincing. It contends previous bill imposed civil notify layoff, permitted penalty provide 538, 100th Cong., 1st Sess. (1987). ultimately enacted version legislation, eliminated provision, result longer speaks "rights welfare unions," Brief Respondent 12. argument "similarly entitled damages, elimination entitlement "employees (1)," 10 flaw force conclude suits unions attributable only congressional inadvertence, whereas inadvertence possible, plausible, explanation authorization. For one, reference very readily understand mean whom owed given. respect, certainly situated." also explain why eliminate power (as could done prior amendment) just right. preferred simply rests speculative possibility opposing straightforward (1)." Speculation loses, more statute's text, effect all provisions, always prevails over mere suggestion disregard ignore duly law legislative oversight. 11 This brings primary case: members.4 Constitution limits judicial "Cases" "Controversies," thereby entailing "irreducible minimum" (2) causal relationship between challenged conduct, (3) likelihood redressed favorable decision. Northeastern Fla. Chapter, Associated Gen. Contractors America Jacksonville, 508 656, 663 (1993); Valley Forge Christian College Americans Separation Church State, Inc., 454 464, 472 (1982). Supplementing these requirements, doctrine come encompass "several judicially self-imposed exercise jurisdiction." Allen Wright, 468 737, (1984); Flast Cohen, 392 83, 97 (1968). so-called 12 notion might assert roots NAACP Alabama ex rel. Patterson, 357 449, 459 (1958), noted purpose scope NAACP's rights litigant, "and every practical sense identical." rely violations First Amendment compelling disclosure membership lists. Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Comm. McGrath, 341 123, 183-187 (1951) (Jackson, concurring); Barrows Jackson, 346 249, 255-259 (1953); Button, 371 415, 428 (1963); Motor Freight Traffic Assn., Inc. States, 372 246, 247 Sierra Club Morton, 405 727, 739 (1972). 13 standing, injuries, without showing emerges trilogy cases. squarely recognized (1975). 14 "The allege them, suffering immediate threatened sort make out justiciable brought [S]o injured party indispensable proper cause, invoke court's 511. 15 Warth's requirements elaborated Hunt. There Commission, state agency whose charge promote State's apple industry, dormant Commerce Clause challenge Carolina forbidding display grades containers. Warth, stated test: 16 "[W]e 17 Finally, Automobile Brock, 477 274 (1986), agency's providing lost jobs competition imports. did argued affected. Reaffirming applying three-part emerging 281-288. Pennell San Jose, 485 1, 7, n. (1988). B 18 prong), prong). lawsuit. 3d, 1431. relied statement "[i]f declaration, injunction, some form relief, reasonably supposed remedy, granted, inure benefit those actually injured. Indeed, cases expressly associations represent kind." 515. These later precedents Telecommunications Research & Action Center Allnet Communication Services, 806 2d 1093, 1094-1095 (CADC 1986) ("lower consistently rejected assertions seek monetary, distinguished declaratory, members") (collecting cases).5 19 One suggested magnitude, Assn. Realtors Real Estate 894 937, 941 (CA7 1990) ("associations relief--but never damages"). agreed suggestion, lack despite Act's permitting take up enquiry character. C 20 Although requirement, own, controversy," 511, our clearly disentangled strands test. Cf. 471 ("it clear opinions particular features `standing' Art. proprio vigore, itself erected compelled language Constitution"); June, Structure Standing Requirements Citizen Suits Scope Congressional Power, 24 Envtl. L. 761, 793 (1994) (noting uncertainty "whether [associational] nature"). say one. 21 two ways addresses redressability. most obviously, guarantees satisfaction requiring type claim) association. As direct address Simon Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization, 426 26, 40 (1976) "can establish representatives right"). is, least, demand plaintiff organized subject member's adversary.6 generally Lujan Defenders Wildlife, 504 555, 560-561 (1992). To resting less than not, course, rob value. well intensity. guard against hazard litigating stage find lacking detailed records show harm sufficient specificity. And hedge risk recovered fail way pockets claimed. considerations point whenever sues another's injury. although litigant ordinarily absent parties," 99, 20; Forge, 474, 751, prohibition litigant's raising another person's legal rights" "judicially limi[t] jurisdiction," mandate. entire "representational standing," "associational standing" strand, premise circumstances, relationships (recognized tradition7 statute8 ) rebut background presumption (in context, about Congress's intent) litigants parties. Hence Constitution. 22 "[R]epresentative litigation common-from actions R. P. 23(b)(3) trustees representing hundreds creditors bankruptcy parens patriae governments executors decedents' estates." re Oil Spill Amoco Cadiz Coast France Mar. 16, 1978, 954 1279, 1319 1992) (per curiam). addition, 706(f)(1) Title VII Civil 1964, 2000e-5(f)(1), authorizes EEOC victims employment discrimination, General Telephone Northwest EEOC, 446 318 (1980), Fair Standards 1938, 201 et. seq., contains comparable Secretary recovery unpaid minimum wages overtime compensation, 216(c). resulting nonadversarial resolve individuals interested, disservice core secret. reason expect portend greater incursions. D 23 limitation, fashioned prudentially imposed, impediment. limitations rules "judicial self-governance" "Congress remove statute." 509. instance. judgment reversed, remanded proceedings consistent opinion. 25 ordered. syllabus constitutes prepared Reporter Decisions reader. Detroit Lumber Co., 200 321, 337. deciding appeal assume truth allegation. Nor reach merits of, about, letter defective sent worked International. alleges employee, statutorily Union's motion amend add plaintiffs. Pet. Cert. 18a-19a. Court's decision respect abuse discretion. 1432. correctness determination outside here. 893, set forth 2104(a)(1): "Any orders title shall employee suffers loss for-- "(A) back pay rate compensation higher of- "(i) average regular received during last years employee's employment; "(ii) final employee; "(B) plan cost medical expenses incurred covered occurred. "Such period maximum days, event one-half number days employed employer." suffered lacked "catch-all prayer relief" 1431, (CA8 1995). award deter future facilitate role assisting light question, occasion today issue. "given simplified provided," 44, abrogated test, need decide action, "simplified" receive paramount role, labor law, play protecting definitively relation sufficient. germaneness may, satisfy rendering representation adequate justify preclusive represented. Phillips Petroleum Shutts, 797 (1985); Matsushita Elec. Industrial Epstein, (1996) (Ginsburg, concurring dissenting part) 9-14). 274, 289 (1986) ("an prove inadequate reasons"); Note, Associational Due Process: Need Adequate Representation Scrutiny, 61 B. Rev. 174 (1981). case, disputes adequacy selected procedures governed body serving collective bargaining employees, representative. NLRB Gissel Packing 395 575 (1969). Whitmore Arkansas, 495 149 (1990) (recognizing next-friend's standing). 78 253, amended, 2000e 52 1060,

Category: 8