Document: 383 U.S. 53 86 S.Ct. 657 15 L.Ed.2d 582 William C. LINN, Petitioner,v.UNITED PLANT GUARD WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 114, et al. No. 45. Argued Nov. 18, 1965. Decided Feb. 21, 1966. [Syllabus from pages 53-54 intentionally omitted] Donald F. Welday, Detroit, Mich., for petitioner. Sol. Gen. Thurgood Marshall the United States, as amicus curiae, by special leave of Court. Winston L. Livingston, respondents. Mr. Justice CLARK delivered opinion 1 The case before us presents question whether, and to what extent, National Labor Relations Act, amended, 61 Stat. 136, 29 U.S.C. § 141 seq. (1964 ed.), bars maintenance a civil action libel instituted under state law an official employer subject seeking damages defamatory statements published during union organizing campaign its officers. District Court dismissed complaint on ground that Board had exclusive jurisdiction over matter. It held such conduct 'would arguably constitute unfair labor practice Section 8(b)' Act San Diego Building Trades Council, etc. v. Garmon, 359 236, 79 773, 3 775 (1959), compelled dismissal preemption grounds. Appeals affirmed, 337 F.2d 68, assuming without deciding in were 'false, malicious, clearly libelous damaging plaintiff, Linn, albeit they relevant union's campaign.' At p. 69. We granted certiorari, 381 923, 85 1558, 14 682. conclude where either party dispute circulates false campaign, court does have apply remedies if complainant pleads proves made with malice injured him. judgment is, therefore, reversed. I. 2 Petitioner assistant general manager Pinkerton's Detective Agency, Inc., filed this suit against respondent union, two officers Pinkerton employee, Leo J. Doyle. alleged that, organize employees respondents circulated among leaflets which stated inter alia: '(7) Now we find out has large volume work Saginaw it years. 4 'United Plant Guard Workers now evidence 5 'A. That 10 jobs Saginaw, Michigan. 6 'B. Employing 52 men. 7 'C. Some these are yrs. old! 8 '(8) Make you feel kind sick & foolish. 9 '(9) men deprived their right vote three N.L.R.B. elections. Their names not summitted (sic). These guards voted into Union 1959! robbed pay increases. manegers (sic) lying us—all time contract was effect. No doubt will file criminal charges. Somebody may go Jail!' further Linn one managers referred leaflet, leaflet 'wholly false, untrue' well knew. did allege any actual or damage but prayed recovery $1,000,000 accusations per se. Federal based diversity citizenship. 11 All respondents, save Doyle, moved dismiss, asserting matter within Board. record indicates prior institution charges Regional Director Board, alleging distribution leaflets, other written material, restrained coerced exercise rights, violation 8(b)(1)(A) Act. refused issue complaint. Finding who 'not officer member charged nor there he acting agent union,' concluded responsible charge was, basis.' This ruling sustained General Counsel some months after filed. 12 In unpublished Judge holding, already noted, even distributing material controlled supra. limiting holding 'to growing Act.' 72. II. 13 been recurring both federal tribunals,1 involving extent supersedes respect libels disputes. Its resolution entails accommodation interest uniform regulation relations traditional concern responsibility State protect citizens attacks. problem is aggravated fact many States presumes publication certain characterized actionable se.2 disputes ordinarily heated affairs; language commonplace might be deemed se jurisdictions. Indeed, representation campaigns frequently bitter extreme charges, countercharges, unfounded rumors, vituperations, personal accusations, misrepresentations distortions. Both management often speak bluntly recklessly, embellishing respective positions imprecatory language. Cafeteria Employees Union, Angelos, 320 293, 295, 64 126, 127, 88 L.Ed. 58 (1943). therefore necessary determine whether actions circumstances interfere national policy. Our task rendered more difficult failure Congress furnish precise guidance legislative history.3 As Jackson said unanimous Garner Teamsters, etc., 346 485, 488, 74 161, 164, 98 228 (1953): 'The * leaves much states, though refrained telling how much. must spell conflicting indications congressional area still permissible.' dealt specific pre-emption problems arising occasions, going back far Allen-Bradley Local 1111, Wisconsin Employment 315 740, 62 820, 1154 (1942). However, framing need look primarily (1959). There most meticulous spelled 'extent variegated laws several displaced single, uniform, rule *.' 241, at 777. emphasized define 'precise closely limited demarcations can adequately fashioned only legislation administration,' while '(o)ur confined dealing classes situations.' 242, 778. respect, yield 'where activity regulated merely peripheral Management (o)r touched interests so deeply rooted local feeling absence compelling direction, could infer power act.' 243—244, 779. short, 100 Ass'n Journeymen Apprentices Borden, 373 690, 693—694, 83 1423, 1425, 638 (1963): 16 '(I)n overriding involved domestic peace, courts defer competence cases litigation protections prohibitions relinquishment essential 'if danger interference policy averted,' equitable relief. Thus first inquiry, claim raised, called reasonably asserted cognizance.' 17 note given frequent consideration type controversies, allowed wide latitude competing parties.4 clear 'police censor propaganda used elections conducts, rather good sense voters appraisal matters, opposing parties correcting inaccurate untruthful statements.' Stewart-Warner Corp., 102 1153, 1158 (1953). set aside election misrepresented campaign; opportunity reply lacking; misrepresentation impact free choice participating election. Hollywood Ceramics Co., 140 221, 223—224 (1962); H. Snow Canning 119 714, 717—718 (1957). Likewise, number cases, epithets 'scab,' 'unfair,' 'liar' struggles indefensible remove them protection 7, erroneous defame dispute. Yet indicated decisions would different uttered malice, 'a deliberate intention falsify' malevolent desire injure.' E.g., Bettcher Mfg. 76 526 (1948); Atlantic Towing 75 1169, 1170—1173 (1948). sum, although tolerates intemperate, abusive attempts employees, interpret giving license injure circulating insulting known false. See Maryland Drydock Co. 183 538 (C.A.4th Cir. 1950). issuing forfeits his Walls Manufacturing 137 1317, 1319 (1962). 18 light considerations appears here 'merely Act,' provided redressing issued knowledge falsity, reckless disregard true Moreover, believe 'an interest' protecting residents malicious should recognized circumstances. conclusion buttressed our Construction Workers, Laburnum 347 656, 833, 1025 (1954), Burton writing held: 19 'To prescribed procedure consequences tortious committed, no concluding existing penalties liabilities eliminated. care took demonstrate conflict between administrative itself, recognition existed, survived.' 665, 838. 20 International Automobile, Russell, 356 634, 78 932, 1030 (1958), again upheld entertain compensatory punitive employee lawful occupation. each 'type conduct' involved, i.e., 'intimidation threats violence,' affected permit jurisdiction. supra, 248, 781. similarly State's 'so responsibility' fits exception specifically carved Garmon. 21 acknowledge enactment 8(c) manifests intent encourage debate issues dividing management.5 And, another context, speech considered 'against background profound commitment principle uninhibited, robust, wide-open, include vehement, caustic, sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks.' New York Times Sullivan, 376 254, 270, 84 710, 721, 686 (1964). Such likewise weigh heavily here; repulsive enjoys immunity falls short untruth. But constitutional context. After all, movement grown up assume ordinary responsibilities. utterance form cannot condoned, unions adopt procedures calculated prevent abuses. III. 22 Nor defamation arises give remedy consequences. itself practice. While violated deliberately making statements, issuance effect require aside, looks coercive misleading nature than quality. injury statement cause individual's reputation—whether official—has relevance Board's function. Cf. Amalgamated Utility Consolidated Edison 309 261, 60 561, 738 (1940). award damages, impose penalty, relief defamed individual. 23 On contrary, designed compensate victim enable him vindicate reputation. lack 'personal' caused libel, together inability provide redress maligned party, vitiates arguments pre-emption.6 stressed Chief dissenting supra: 24 unprovoked infliction injuries period unrest neither expected justified, economic loss inevitably attends stoppages. Fruthermore, assessed regard merits controversy 649, 941. 25 Judicial condemnation attack Linn's character reflect upon objectives union. Furthermore, 26 insisted threat suits dampen ardor truncate discussion envisioned weapons coercion. view propensity juries excessive defamation, availability pose stability smaller employers. order legitimate effective administration possibility minimized. limit those instances show damage. 27 standards enunciated (1964), adopted analogy, compulsion. test effectuate statutory design pre-emption. Construing falsity abuse unwarranted intrusion 28 pointed out, characteristic courts. categories developed reference controversies. jurisdictions, amount recovered depends severity resulting harm. salutary principle. hold recover except proof harm, reputation, consequent mental suffering, alienation associates, items pecuniary loss, whatever harm tort law.7 generally close contact pressures makes especially followed. If awarded excessive, duty trial judge remittitur new trial. establish suffered sort compensable prerequisite additional damages.8 Since make allegations actions, remand amend complaint, desires, meet requirements. event he, course, bears burden allegations. IV. 30 Finally, argued permitting impinge because judicial employers spurn appropriate sanctions contemporaneous violations disagree. When frown reasons, request ignored since alone adjust equilibrium disturbed contributed victory fought election, few satisfied simply defamation. An unsuccessful also seek results fruits employer's libel. And similar contribute act cross purposes since, seen, policies inconsistent. 31 Garrison Louisiana, 379 64, 75, 209, 216, 125: '(T)he use lie tool once odds premises democratic government orderly manner economic, social, political change effected.' rules laid down appropriately redressed curtailment beyond needs experience shows greater curtailment, total one, impairment policy, reconsider today's holding. deal solely degree pre-empted 32 Reversed remanded. 33 BLACK, dissenting. 34 holds individual participant side sue account heat By same token I Court's members when say naughty things Court-made tosses monkey wrench collective bargaining machinery try settle disputes, exalts higher level importance day-to-day life country. 35 passed known, almost all people do, sides masters arts vilification, invective exaggeration. passing purpose purify force disputants nice about another. do intended participants insults hurl battle. object bring agreements bargaining, add fuel fire encouraging inevitable irritations disputeprolonging tendencies. conceive element create guaranteed fruitful discussions presence monetary gained generating anger vengeance part parties. think, 'arguably' basic peaceably—not aggravate them, end them. For reason affirm lower 36 Thornhill Alabama, 310 88, 102, 736, 744, 1093, 'In times dissemination information concerning facts regarded Constitution.' Discussion free, however, meaning First Amendment, penalized judgments actions. concurring opinions Douglas myself 686, 125, my Rosenblatt Baer, 94, 669. strange import novel ideas controversies bound abridge freedom discuss through peaceful negotiations. hopes modern settlements working themselves aegis substituted old-time feuds too accompanied strife wasteful, dangerous conflicts verging private war. Because inconsistent Constitution dissent reversing below. 37 FORTAS, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE DOUGLAS join, 38 opinion, decision present opens major breach wall heretofore weaponry defined law, violence intimidation involved. arming weapon jeopardizes measure painstakingly achieved labor-management relations. introduces potentially disruptive device comprehensive structure created resolving doing, arrangement Congress, but, departs own narrowly occasions may, outside framework, litigate 39 judgment, handling precludes entertaining agents allegedly matters fabric just case. 40 sought organized Court, relate course accuse NLRB deprive 41 illustration hyperbole strife, 'libel' hardly incendiary. To experienced eye, pale anemic compared rich colorful freely exchanged disputes.1 42 response pallid 'libel,' today petitioner, perceiving himself target purportedly statement, damages—so long defamatory, Should succeed clearing hurdles thus path, compensation 'injuries,' exemplary well. requirements petitioner plead prove damages—arising well-founded otherwise 'pose employers'—may cold comfort potential defendant suit. 'Malice,' defines falsify injure, largely subjective standard, responsive ingenuity counsel predilections jury. 'injury' words tangible trauma. afford dubious defense battlefield qualified umpire—the removed. suit, outcome determined alien relations, take complex subtle values stake, jury unfamiliar quality rhetoric customary outcome, fact, apt immediate community attitudes toward unionization appreciation underlying, long-term perplexities interplay society. 43 Until today, consistently breached encumbered protected prohibited legislation, 'arguably to' law2—and despite victime. 228, enjoin picketing plaintiff's grievance NLRB. Guss Utah 353 1, 77 598, 601, declines conceded 'affecting commerce,' parallel board nonetheless pre-empted. 775, picketing, subject' statute NLRB's jurisdiction.3 Liner Jafco, 375 301, 391, 347; 638; 438, Constr. Laborers' Curry, 371 542, 531, 514. Today marks departure become well-established public's preventing exclusiveness breached. U.S., 247, S.Ct., 780: 'Even States' effort wrongs grant past exerted regulate activities regulatory scheme.' majority's fails why participant's reputation sting allow protect, preserving well-being illegal not. 44 restricting permissible exceptions excluding purely wrongs, Nation's success domesticating explosive warfare management. announced threatens achieved. think underestimates inflict equilibrium, overestimates effectiveness restraint result superimposed damages. 45 support Congress. majority concedes, unmistakable terms dialogue untrammelled fear retribution strong utterances. manifested awareness lusty provides useful safety valve tensions accompany example, 'expressing views, argument, expression contains reprisal promise benefit.' 158(c) ed.).4 statutes, 411(a)(2) construed disciplining utter internal Salzhandler Caputo, 316 445 (C.A.2d Cir.), cert. denied, 946, 344, 275; Cole Hall, 339 881 Cir.); Stark Twin City Carpenters Dist. 219 F.Supp. 528 (D.C.D.Minn.). Where wishes jurisdiction, explicitly. 187 authorizing 158, assert 151 ed.). 46 foregoing verbal dispute, involves person instances, perhaps ought wrong suffered. amendment maintained basis circumscribed accusation contained demonstrates very substantial opened insulated vagaries lawsuits.5 Brantley Devereaux, 237 156 (D.C.E.D.S.C.1965); Meyer Joint Council 53, Int'l Bro. 416 Pa. 401, 206 A.2d 382, petition Rule 60, 382 897, 193, 154 (1965). Blum Assn. Machinists, N.J. 389, 201 terminology avoid confusion concept se, applied designate whose extrinsic facts. Although alleges 'libelous se,' specify harmed meant rely presumption Under circulation statements; necessarily includes meaning. declared self-or-ganization, bargain collectively representatives choosing, engage concerted mutual aid protection. 7. 8(a) restrain coerce rights. 8(b) protects rights organization agents. views 'shall addition, 9(c)(1) authorizes conditions, certify thereof. grants enforce Bok, Regulation Campaign Tactics Representation Elections Harv.L.Rev. 38, 66 wording indicates, serve immunizing controversy. Rather, shall 142 (1947), likely section narrower purpose, attributing antiunion motive statements. H.R.Rep.No. 510, 80th Cong., 1st Sess., (1947). U.S.Code Congressional Service, 1135. Comparison express criticize officers, 73 523 strengthens interpretation intent. authority aggravates refusal creates disrespect encourages hands. function recognized. Developments Law—Defamation, 69 875, 933 (1956). see 125 Government, urged further. liability 'grave' defamations—those having engaged criminal, homosexual, treasonable, infamous conduct. agree. artificial characterizations encroach noted Russell. defendants' violence. Compare, considerably imaginative vituperation reflected Steelworkers America R. Bouligny, 145, 272, 217. A description found Brief Respondent, (No. 19, O.T.1965). Suits arise 185(a) ed.) hence reach doctrine. Smith Evening News Assn., 195, 267, 246; Sovern, 301 Primary Jurisdiction NLRB, 529 (1963). Subsequent Garmon Guss, explicity removed obstacles state-court treatment declined insufficient interstate commerce. 164(c)(2) predicate charge, like induce 82—84 Resort auxiliary abstract threat. tendency invoke list recently pending Fourth Circuit Petitiioner, 15, supra; discussed pp. 18—39 Appendix brief Nos. 89 O.T.1965, amici curiae.

Category: 9