Document: 523 U.S. 653118 S.Ct. 1626140 L.Ed.2d 863 TEXTRON LYCOMING RECIPROCATING ENGINE DIVISION, AVCO CORP., Petitioner,v.UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, INTERNATIONAL UNION and Its Local 787. No. 97-463. Supreme Court of the United States Argued Feb. 23, 1998. Decided May 18, Syllabus * Petitioner Textron Lycoming Reciprocating Engine Division (Textron) respondents-an international union one its locals (hereinafter Union), which represented approximately 500 employees-were parties to a collective-bargaining agreement that prohibited Union from striking for any reason required notify before entering into "subcontract out'' work would otherwise be performed by members. After announced plans subcontract out enough cause roughly one-half members lose their jobs, filed present complaint, which, inter alia, alleged had fraudulently induced sign agreement, sought damages declaratory judgment was voidable at Union's option. The complaint invoked §301(a) Labor Management Relations Act as basis federal subject-matter jurisdiction, but did not allege either party ever violated terms agreement. District dismissed lack concluding action come within §301(a). Third Circuit reversed. Held: Because alleges no violation neither this nor courts below have jurisdiction under §301(a), confers only over " [s]uits contracts.'' While court may, in course resolving dispute concerning adjudicate affirmative defense contract invalid, see Kaiser Steel Corp. v. Mullins, 455 72, 85-86, 102 851, 860-861, 70 833, it has resolve such contention independently of, rather than ancillary to, power Here, since contract, seeks relief own violation, does lie. reliance upon fact declaration voidability Declaratory Judgment rests on several less certain assumptions, Skelly Oil Co. Phillips Petroleum Co., 339 667, 876, 94 L.Ed. 1194, distinguished, is event inadequate because there indication interest contract's voidability, hence case or controversy issue giving access courts. Pp. ____-____. 117 F.3d 119, SCALIA, J., delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, C.J., STEVENS, O'CONNOR, KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, GINSBURG, JJ., joined. concurring opinion. BREYER, an part judgment. Timothy B. Dyk, Washington, DC, petitioner. Stephen Yokich, respondent. Justice SCALIA Court. 1 sole question presented review whether Act, 1947, 61 Stat. 156, 29 U.S.C. §185(a). 2 Petitioner, (Textron), employs Williamsport, Pennsylvania, plant respondents, Automobile, Aerospace Agricultural Implement Workers America 187 UAW Union). From April 1, 1994, 1997, were against and, through adoption separate memorandum give seven days' notice In June planned volume jobs. 3 Thereafter, November 1995, Federal alleging Specifically, claims both during negotiations repeatedly asked provide information might regarding members; negotiations, completed plan, despite repeated requests said nothing about existence. As redress, "a existing collective bargaining between option [the] UAW,'' "compensatory punitive . compensate [the members] harm caused [Textron's] misrepresentations concealments deter other Employers similar conduct.'' App. 19. invokes §185(a).1 4 set forth Appeals reversed, 119 (1997); we granted certiorari, 522 ----, 118 439, 139 338 (1997). II 5 Section 301(a) provides: 6 "Suits contracts employer labor organization representing employees industry affecting commerce defined organizations, may brought district having parties, without respect amount regard citizenship parties.'' 7 By terms, provision Union, Government amicus brief support contend includes suits invalid. Focusing breadth word "for,'' argues "is broad encompass suit "alleges' also concerns intended establish legal right engage what violation.'' Brief Amicus Curiae 11 (footnotes omitted). It true enough, points out, numerous definitions "for'' [i]ndicating end with reference anything acts, serves, done; preparation towards, against, view of; goal object; With purpose object to.'' Webster's New International Dictionary 984 (2d ed.1950) (def.2). Even applying definition, must make considerable stretch bring it. This obviously "purpose object'' contract. most can assert (and falls short definition) facilitate "what violation[s].'' (emphasis added). 8 More basically, however, "fundamental principle statutory construction (and, indeed, language itself) meaning cannot determined isolation, drawn context used.'' Deal States, 508 129, 132, 113 1993, 1996, 124 44 (1993). Accord Cohen de la Cruz, 1212, 1217, --- ---- (1998). are seeking here, That phrase possibly bear ascribed Government. No one, example, describe corporation's harassing lawsuit competitor "suit unfair competition,'' even though precisely "goal object.'' same vein, "for contract'' "with to'' future (much "otherwise be'' violation). been violated, just competition'' competition occurred. context, unmistakably backward-looking connotation, i.e., cause, motive, occasion act, state, condition; hence, account consequence effect sake as, cursed himself showing leniency.'' (def.7). contracts'' claim violated. 9 mean never validity simply erects gateway pass court; once they entered, restrict landscape traverse. Thus if, deciding plaintiff entitled defendant's defendant interposes consistent defense. See 833 (1982). Similarly, accused violating ask declare But these cases, court's independent 10 seem matter. violation. Indeed, far discloses, absolute compliance lie case. asserts outcome altered pursuant 28 §2201.2 order determine lies declaratory-judgment aspect suit, look character threatened interpose defense, Textron's breach relies our decision 1194 (1950), held asserting nonfederal "civil actio[n] arising laws States'' federal-question statute, §1331. argument makes assumptions do think indulged. 12 First, assumes facts converse -i.e., raising anticipated claim-would confer §1331 jurisdiction. clear. argued anticipating more effectively claim. (The latter, course, barred well-pleaded-complaint rule, Rivet Regions Bank La., ---------, 921, 924-925, 912 (1998)). Perhaps permit anticipation, Franchise Tax Board Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 19, n. 103 2841, 2851, 77 420 (1983), issue, some suggests claim.3 squarely confronted explicitly upheld presents defense; cites court.4 13 Second, suffice sustain premised two provisions quite different. Whereas authorizes actions (which arguably embrace civil presenting claim), 14 assuming (without deciding) suffices well, prayer save not, record shows did, so time, expired; concrete time filed. 15 We evidence did. To sure, vigorously contested complaint's allegations fraud asserted claimed well damages; defending binding nature establishing nonbinding (as expected sort) situation strike contracting-out, violate strike. appears, company eliminated half Williamsport perfectly willing excused negotiated when stronger position, intent disposition exercise theoretical avoid better could negotiate anew. claim, if successful, appears) cared about, "case actual controversy,'' §2201, "The 1934, limitation "cases controversy,' manifestly constitutional [Art. III, §2] operative controversies sense.'' Aetna Life Ins. Haworth, 300 227, 239-240, 57 461, 463, 81 617 (1937). Public Serv. Comm'n Utah Wycoff 344 237, 242-243, 73 236, 97 291 (1952). 16 *** 17 Labor-Management Act. Accordingly, 18 concurring. 19 If true, seems clear petitioner duty bargain good faith. Our conclusion therefore comports important protecting primary National disputes process. long recognized, [i]t implicit entire structure [National Relations] acts oversee referee process bargaining.'' H.K. Porter NLRB, 397 99, 107-108, 90 821, 825-826, 25 146 (1970). "Congress evidently considered centralized administration specially designed procedures necessary obtain uniform application substantive rules.'' Garner Teamsters, 346 485, 490, 74 161, 166, 98 228 (1953). rules governing arise special competence Board. Cf. San Diego Building Trades Council Garmon, 359 245, 79 773, 779-780, 775 (1959). undoubtedly expertise area judges provides additional Congress meant rejecting Government's reading language. 20 21 I agree pages Court's failed show (or allege) significant likelihood then sue ante, __. write separately, factual circumstance significance suggests. __-__. my view, shown consequent breach-of-contract imminent, authorized controversy. Unlike leave matter undecided. 22 My flows following propositions: Proposition One. permits "declare rights relations interested party'' exists "actual controversy'' "within jurisdiction'' court. §2201(a). 23 Two. 301 (LMRA), §185(a), employer's (i.e., agreement's) "no strike'' clause forbids ongoing related free itself __; (" [B]efore enforcing defenses process''); 13-14; 24 One means gives "rights'' "legal relations'' where "controversy'' described Two "actual,'' e.g., imminent. Moreover, pointed [f]ederal regularly taken original [such here] coercive enforce rights, necessarily question.'' Bd. Cal. Construction Trust Southern Cal., (1983). Hence characterization valid "defense'' §301 beside point. ibid.; 248, 242, (1952) (in "it action, will Court''); 10A Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R. Miller, & Mary Kay Kane, Practice Procedure §2767, p. 741 ed.1983) ("federal exist crucial jurisdiction''). draws Act's basic objective, "to adjudication party's right.'' Board, supra, S.Ct., And practice prevalence lower "reverse'' focus likely including found contexts now us. See, El Paso Bldg. Constr. Chapter Associated Gen. Contractors Am., 376 F.2d 797, 799-800 (C.A.5 1967) (union strike, determination validity, took §301); McNally Pittsburg, Inc. Assn. Bridge, Structural, Ornamental Iron Workers., 812 615 (C.A.10 1987) (where existed union, allowed seek prospective invalid); Mobil Oil, Chemical Atomic Int'l AFL-CIO, 483 603 1973) (same), rev'd grounds, 504 272 (1974) (en banc). Walker Process Equipment, Food Machinery Corp., 382 172, 176, 86 347, 350, 247 (1965) (one sued patent infringement "need await filing patentee; tested Act''). 26 find exception forbid law one. contrary, suggested availability furthers LMRA's purposes. Textile Lincoln Mills Ala., 353 448, 454-455, 912, 916-917, 972 (1957) (§301 promote "industrial peace'' "provid[ing] remedies''); id., 455-456, 917 (quoting floor statement Representative Barden, 93 Cong. Rec. 3656-3657 (1947), "the section contemplates ordinary lawsuits remedial proceedings, equitable, appropriate [including suit] Judgments secure declarations contract''); Smith Evening News Assn., 371 195, 199, 83 267, 270, 246 (1962) [Section] given narrow reading''). curiae brief, tells us interfere law. 27 ("The concluded cases based inducement unduly intrude authority''). like provided however demonstrates controversy.'' §2201(a); 463-464, ultimate conclusion. syllabus constitutes prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Timber Lumber 200 321, 337, 282, 287, 50 499. asserts, footnote elaboration, "there §301, "arises under' common contract.'' Respondents 11. contained Question Presented Petition Certiorari, read: "Whether §185, "[s]uits organization,' absence agreement.'' provides, relevant part, [i]n pleading, declaration, further sought.'' Prior Judgment] entertain immediately enforceable remedy money injunction way recognizing plaintiff's immediate enforcement asked.'' 671-672, 879, (1950). [I]t settled doctrine "upon ground depends nature, appear, outset, bill suing, character.' suggestion party, up Constitution those laws.''' Id., 672, quoting Tennessee Planters' Bank, 152 454, 464, 654, 657, 38 511 (1894). observed, seeming approval, U.S., 2851. forward observation, infringers themselves raise question.

Category: 8