Document: 345 U.S. 653 73 S.Ct. 906 97 L.Ed. 1325 TRANSCONTINENTAL & WESTERN AIR, Inc.v.KOPPAL. No. 509. Argued April 8 and 9, 1953. Decided June 1, Mr. Horace G. Hitchcock, New York City, for petitioner. Messrs. Fred J. Freel Ray D. Jones, Jr., Kansas Mo., respondent. Justice BURTON delivered the opinion of Court. 1 This case presents two questions: (1) whether a discharged employee carrier that is subject to Railway Labor Act precluded by from resorting state-recognized cause action wrongful discharge and, if not, (2) whether, in such action, he must show has exhausted his administrative remedies, under contract employment. For reasons hereafter stated, our answer first question no second, yes, provided applicable state law so requires. After stating case, we shall discuss second first. 2 Respondent Koppal citizen who, 1949, was employed as master mechanic Missouri, petitioner, Transcontinental Western Air, Inc., Delaware corporation. At all times material this petitioner been air, engaged interstate commerce Title II Act.1 The terms respondent's employment were stated written agreement between International Association Machinists. That association union which, collective-bargaining purposes, represented respondent other mechanics employ although not member union. 3 November 8, reported employer telephone well would be able work day. Before noon, representative petitioner's Industrial Relations Department made an unexpected call at home. He found there with employees, one whom also had taken sick leave. While testimony conflicting, substantial evidence support conclusion sufficiently ill justify staying home that, prearrangement, met employees while preparing take examination qualify flight engineer. On return next day, suspended on charge abuse sick-leave provisions notified hearing held 11, pursuant grievance procedure contract. attended hearing, which before than bringing complaint. its conclusion, officer severe sick-pay policy discharged. In view past favorable record, asked him prefer resign advised could appeal even resigned. 4 resigned, did 'under protest.' took but, 30, 1950, instituted present proceeding United States District Court claiming diversity citizenship seeking $7,500 compensatory $15,000 punitive damages. 5 During trial, jury, (then defendant) moved directed verdict favor similar motion close evidence. Both motions denied jury returned court set aside dismissed complaint ground failed original decision otherwise exhaust remedies prescribed Appeals, judge dissenting, reversed judgment remanded further proceedings. Cir., 199 F.2d 117. Because differing opinions expressed effect decisions Moore v. Illinois Central R. Co., 312 630, 61 754, 85 1089, Slocum Delaware, L. W.R. 339 239, 70 577, 94 795, due importance relation Act, granted certiorari. 344 933, 504.2 6 jurisdiction rested upon adequate amount controversy. sought damages resulting alleged unlawful violation performed Missouri agreed parties 'Missouri contract.' Accordingly, involved, but substantive should determine requirements interpretation measure applied, Erie Co. Tompkins, 304 64, 58 817, 82 1188; Klaxon Stentor Electric Mfg. 313 487, 1020, 1477. 7 No Supreme cited point shown, following cases, order sustain case. Appeals Eighth Circuit, 1934, affirmed Eastern effect. Harrison Pullman 68 826. removed court, porter sued employer, Company, November, 1926. printed contained complete code adjustment disputes. called initial district official company, subsequent highest local company designated handle matters, then Zone General Committee finally Bureau Relations. attempt follow beyond none whatever reach Committee. Instead, about five years later, brought suit litigation, affirming said: 9 'Appellant sues because breach contract, prevail, himself within unable secure satisfactory means therein expressly provided. do, reason justiciable controversy.' page 827. 10 Similarly, 1936, St. Louis Reed S.W.R. 95 S.W.2d 887 (not published State Reports), like position. There conductor Southwestern Railroad 1928. Order Conductors railroad. review discharges. charged intoxication charge, assistant superintendent company. resulted conductor's resorted appeals code. won discharge. trial employer's demurrer based contract.3 11 Respondent's instant consisted simply related service, entered into 'in accordance amended * *.' It detailed included status discharged— 12 'without fair Company against employee. reasonable time prior duly authorized will apprised, writing, precise given opportunity presence necessary witnesses. A issued (5) days after hearing. If satisfactory, may Step 3.' 13 chief operating Notice intent writing ten above-mentioned part 2. union, matter referred system general chairman, acting board or, mutual agreement, arbitration. comparable described provides disputes 'shall handled usual manner up including disputes', appropriate boards National Air Transport Adjustment Board. 49 Stat. 1189—1190, 45 U.S.C. §§ 184, 185, U.S.C.A. 185. 14 Under shown above, required exhaustion action. As do so, Court's dismissal justified, unless fact or drafted make difference. 15 important conforms handling grievances avoid litigation interruptions does deprive right sue chooses so. 16 '(W)e find nothing (Railway Labor) purports away courts controversy over finding prerequisite filing court. Circuit properly decided seek railroad discharge.' 634, 636, 756, 1089. 17 We amplified foregoing statement 244, 580, follows: 18 'Moore (in 1089) have challenged validity Board, reinstatement back pay. Instead chose accept railroad's discharging final, thereby ceasing employee, held, bar adjudicating cases. common-law statutory differs any remedy Board power provide, involve questions future relations employees. consider some provision course binding interpretations Board.' 19 result whereas, exclusive adjust jurisdictional type involved claim unlawfully Such proceed either procedures resort recognize claim. Where permits recovery without showing recover, supra, Mississippi law.4 20 hand, law, requires done Here carrier, many steps relief, consistent Act. free very contemplated dismissed. 21 therefore, reversed. it. 22 Reversed remanded. 23 DOUGLAS dissents. 24 REED consideration 1189 et seq., 181—188, 181—188. grant limited presented petition writ, viz.: '1. Whether precludes application controlling, governing bring '2. requiring dispute redress collective bargaining Act.' '* assignment error rule where provides, appealing certain officers, boards, tribunals, pursue cannot complain until accorded taken.' pages 888—889. settled contracting agree are tribunal controversies, they redress.' Glass Hoblitzelle, Tex.Civ.App., 83 796, 802. See also, Bell 228 Ala. 328, 153 So. 434. quotation citation relied 889. received $4,183.20, discharge, establishing proceedings, see Yazoo M.V.R. 176 Miss. 65, 166 395; 180 276, 593; D.C., F.Supp. 731; 112 959; 136 412. Texas N.O.R. McCombs, 143 Tex. 257, 183 716.

Category: 9