Document: 348 U.S. 511 75 S.Ct. 452 99 L.Ed. 600 AMALGAMATED CLOTHING WORKERS OF AMERICA, et al., Petitioners,v.The RICHMAN BROTHERS. No. 173. Argued March 4 and 7, 1955. Decided April 4, Mr.William J. Isaacson, for petitioners. Mr. Luther Day, Cleveland, Ohio, respondent. Philip Elman, Washington, D.C., N.L.R.B. amicus curiae by special leave of Court. Justice FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion 1 In Weber v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 468, 480, decided last Monday on writ certiorari to Missouri Supreme Court, we considered jurisdiction a state court enjoin conduct which in one aspect brought it within exclusive federal authority under Taft-Hartley Act another constituted violation statute against restraint trade. this case have decide question whether, similar circumstances, union has open it, without resorting appellate procedures State eventually district employer from pursuing his action court. 2 Petitioner, an unincorporated association clothing workers, was responsible peaceful picketing number respondent's retail stores, presumably compel its factory employees join union. Respondent, Ohio corporation engaged manufacture sale men's interstate commerce, filed suit Court Common Pleas Cuyahoga County, alleging that union's common-law conspiracy as well statutory It prayed temporary permanent injunctions. The proceedings remove United States District Northern claiming employer's petition alleged facts bringing original civil arising Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 141 seq. 28 U.S.C. 1337, 1337. That remanded ground if, contended, complaint effect 8(b)(1)(A) decision Garner Teamsters, Chauffeurs Helpers Local Union, 776 (A.F.L.), 346 485, 74 161, 98 228, only National Labor Relations Board had subject matter. Richman Brothers Co. Amalgamated Clothing Workers America, 114 F.Supp. 185, rehearing denied, 116 800. 3 Upon remand, invoked taken denying motion dismiss This denied opinion. then same seeking injunction would require withdraw commenced Jurisdiction based provision confers courts over any Congress regulating commerce. also relied 1651, all-writs section. held 2283, prohibits injunctions proceedings, power grant requested relief, inasmuch did not come exceptions general prohibition. Appeals Sixth Circuit unanimously affirmed, 211 F.2d 449. jurisdictional is plainly important area federal-state relations granted certiorari, 813, 43. Subsequent affirmance Appeals, ruled favorably injunction. Com.Pl., N.E.2d 60. 5 1. Under may assume controversy whatever relief afford, therefore outside authority. whether may, before been entertained at request private parties, attempt secure through proceedings. 6 We need re-examine series decisions, prior enactment Title Code 1948, appeared recognize implied historic prohibition interference with judicial See Toucey New York Life Ins. Co., 314 118, 62 139, 86 100. By enactment, made clear beyond cavil be whittled away improvisation. Former 265 Judicial provided: 7 'The shall stay State, except cases where such authorized law relating bankruptcy.' 36 Stat. 1162. 8 1948 revised codified. old section thus embodied new 2283: 9 'A expressly Congress, or necessary aid jurisdiction, protect effectuate judgments.' 10 lieu bankruptcy exception 265, substituted generalized phrase covering all exceptions, Interpleader 2361, found statutes. Two newly formulated deal problems administration earlier decisions dealt case. If confirmation comprehensive scope revealed face were necessary, Reviser's Notes, state: 11 'An Acts omitted cover exceptions.'1 12 carefully cannot accept argument petitioner Board, curiae, 2283 does apply whenever moving party alleges 'wholly matter, having invaded field pre-empted Congress.' No established former 265.2 event, left no justification recognition now. conveying broad policy appropriate ad hoc application. Legislative here expressed clear-cut qualified specifically defined exceptions. 13 are further admonished taking liberty interpolation when clearly room inadmissibility assumption ascertainment pre-emption self-determining even easy. As noted case, 'the areas thereby withdrawn susceptible delimitation fixed metes bounds.' page 487. What first determined so. 14 2. turn, therefore, specific exemptions contained 2283. these permits issue 'as Congress'. present directed 'express' authorization most attenuated meaning term. Of course prescribed formula required; refer But authorization, freest use word, help petitioner. provided administrative agency pass claims rights restrictions imposed disregarded. Only after well-founded remedies their vindication review into being. However, injunctive restraining order obtained pending final adjudication 'upon issuance complaint' there 'reasonable cause believe' truth charge 'has unfair labor practice paragraph (4)(A), (B), (C) 8(b).' explicitly gave behalf officer regional attorney whom matter referred'. 10(j), (l), 61 149, 160(j, l), l). To hold authorizes litigant interim ignore closely circumscribed given generalize chosen specify. find vested parties accords other aspects Act. Utility Consolidated Edison York, 309 261, 60 561, 84 738. Such recognized Capital Service, Inc. 347 501, 699, 887. 15 permit proceed unchecked incursion upon federally domain dislocates scheme whole. rephrasing suggestion preempted legislation must yield. thrust deeper particular circumstances process amount practice, if seek mechanism will protected until lifted. employer, who might remedy issued not, law, appealable,3 available necessarily time-consuming. Thus, so runs, unless can intervene, delay undercut legislative scheme, but opportunity effective activity diminished lost. 16 proceeds adequately courts, 'gap' complained impatience go wrong. during more than half our history establishing lower main adequacy systems enforce rights, With limited 1875 questions.4 During entire period, depended procedure attacks grossly inadequate could contemplated Congress. continuing evidence confidence reinforced desire avoid direct conflicts between courts. 17 misplaced. Neither nor actions since Union demonstrates recalcitrance part rather subtle line demarcation allowable problems. effort define what them, Garner, just Term, hedged qualifications, enforcement such. 18 Misapplication Court's opinions confined delays litigation peculiar them. interfere, notions policy, add rightful forum settlement established. A court's assertion equity denial turn give rise collateral issue. There added element competition conflict trusted exploited complicate, simplify, existing difficulties. 19 3. 'where jurisdiction' remains considered. lawyer-like sense proceeding thought jurisdiction. duties call Board. nonexistent aided.5 20 Insofar protection needed Board's exercise has, seen, resort, powers. Since very presupposition court, safeguarding seek, satisfied itself complaint. 21 urged deliberately prevent going For thing, yet that, resorts relation obviously bounds finding practice.6 resort circumvented entertain complaint, bound repeat insofar penumbral region remain touching industrial finally clarified definitive rulings must, view allowed run course, including ultimate reviewing 22 Affirmed. 23 HARLAN took consideration 24 Chief WARREN, BLACK DOUGLAS concur, dissenting. 25 doubt, apart limitations 2283,1 13372 sought true plaintiff Service 1337 terms makes distinction public plaintiffs. 26 precludes stated, 505, 702, note 2: 27 'In ruling, unnecessary consider justified enjoining intrusion Cf. Bowles Willingham, 321 503, 510—511, 64 641, 645, 88 892.' now here. Willingham landlord Price Administrator issuing certain rent orders Emergency Control Exclusive determine validity orders, argued, Appeals. upheld Administrator's position. Code3 predecessor 2283—was bar Administrator, 511, 645: 30 'Congress favor exclusion rule designed collisions authorities (Toucey supra) play.' Thus stood succeeded 2283.4 31 Contrary majority opinion, broader predecessor, 265. Indeed, express purpose contract—not expand—the Revisers stated exceptions.'5 (Italics added.) substantive change overruling barred personam involving claim previously adjudicated Revisers, approving dissent, restores basic generally understood interpreted decision. Changes phraseology.'6 enacting rejected philosophy inflexibility.7 However imprecise language abundantly intended repeal pre-existing 32 read literally—as does—ignores century history.8 addition, reasons pointed out dissenting literal interpretation seriously frustrates regulatory resolution kind dispute involved although adjudicate long file charge; incentive do outstanding. I reverse. 33 DOUGLAS, CHIEF JUSTICE 34 So reads read, relevant here, Code. 35 explained Oklahoma Packing Gas & Electric 9, 215, 218, 537, 'to needless friction courts.' is, however, construed applied today way defeat scheme. today's allows intrude agencies, i.e., primary leaving aggrieved relief. concurrent agencies. takes placed firmly completely words forbidden intrude. addition make congressional clearer. 37 Where agencies controversy, should qualify pro tanto. up time. Removal Acts, starting 73, 79, removed once passed Those Dietzsch Huidekoper, 103 494, 497; Madisonville Traction St. Bernard Mining 196 239, 245, 251, 253, 49 462. construction 1851 liability shipowners shipowner transfers interest vessel trustee benefit claimants, 'all owner owners cease.' 635, 636. Providence N.Y.S.S. Hill Mfg. 109 578, 600, 379, 393, 617, 1038, despite Limited Liability ousted otherwise thwarted. 38 showed clearer qualification tanto 39 ready imply common situation required it. possession res, control extent interfering property. result flies Yet preferable avoiding unseemly clashes authorities. Hagan Lucas, Pet. 400, 403, 470; Kline Burke Const. 260 226, 229, 235, 43 81, 83, 67 226. Another illustration, points out, 892, stronger presented. 40 like dislocate severely decision, move strike. injunction, granted, practical purposes settle transfer seems assumed both committed practice. powerless action. lingers appeal Montgomery Building Construction Trades Council Ledbetter Erection 344 178, 73 196, 97 204. take substantial time trial prepare record support Once long, drawn-out hierarchy commences. decides beginning principle year passed; alone probably defeated claim. 41 undermines regulation; emasculates remedy; labormanagement circumvent enacted resolve disputes. 42 cries tactics evasion. position aggrieved. Either standing 887, invoke Certainly 'arising commerce' supra, 504, 701. H.R.Rep. 308, 80th Cong., 1st Sess. A181. Petitioner emphasize statement Notes Toucy (sic) decision.' Even mean wording, derive content contain precedent proceeding. 2, infra. Moreover, context quoted refers problem * play', 1942, 56 23, particularly Office Administration 205(a), 33. observation revision 1948. merely serves preserve status quo hearing appealable §§ 2505.02, 2505.03 Page's Rev.Code 1954. May Bailey 81 471, 91 N.E. 183; Tipling Randall Park Holding 94 App. 279. short-lived 'Midnight Judges' February 13, 1801, 89, repealed 8, 1802, 132, so-called specialties, grants 3, 1875, 470. Cornell L.Q. 499, 507—509. referred antecedents holding mandamus 'in acting manner Appeals' review. These never authoritatively suggested example potential finds roots iin traditional concepts relationship inferior superior system, relevance offending enjoined insulated two intervening essentially unrelated systems, nature, manifestation distinct sovereign W. T. Carter Brother, 90 2020, procuring prohibiting employee activities constitutes 8(a)(1) designates guaranteed 7. argues situations bad faith organization underlying Section provides: commerce protecting trade restraints monopolies.' Hale Bimco Trading, 306 375, 378, 59 526, 527, 83 771; Wells Fargo Taylor, 254 175, 183, 93, 96, 65 L.Ed 205. Sess., p. Id., A182. Moore's Commentary (1949), 407, 410; Note, 48 Nw.U.L.Rev. (1953) 383. Hart Wechsler, Federal Courts System, 1075—1076 (1953); 395—407, 410 (1949).

Category: 8