Document: 382 U.S. 145 86 S.Ct. 272 15 L.Ed.2d 217 UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, Petitioner,v.R. H. BOULIGNY, INC. No. 19. Argued Oct. 21, 1965. Decided Nov. 22, Michael Gottesman, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Joseph W. Grier, Jr., Charlotte, N.C., respondent. Mr. Justice FORTAS delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Respondent, a North Carolina corporation, brought this action in state court. It sought $200,000 damages defamation alleged to have occurred during course United Steelworkers' campaign unionize respondent's employees. The Steelworkers, an unincorporated labor union whose principal place business purportedly is Pennsylvania, removed case Federal District Court.1 asserted not only federal-question jurisdiction, but that purposes diversity jurisdiction it was citizen although some its members were Carolinians. 2 corporation remanded courts, contending complaint raised no federal questions and relying upon generally prevailing principle association's citizenship each members. But Court retained jurisdiction. Judge noted 'a trend treat associations same manner as corporations them citizens wherein office located.' Divining 'no common sense reason treating national differently from corporation,' he declined follow what styled 'the poorer reasoned more firmly established rule' Chapman v. Barney, 129 677, 9 426, 32 L.Ed. 800. 3 On interlocutory appeal Appeals Fourth Circuit reversed directed be courts. 336 F.2d 160. Certiorari granted, 379 958, 85 666, 13 554, so we might decide whether treated without regard members.2 Because believe properly matter legislative consideration which cannot adequately or appropriately dealt with by Court, affirm decision Appeals. 4 Article III, § 2, Constitution provides: 5 'The judicial Power shall extend * Controversies between Citizens different States *.' 6 Congress lost time implementing grant. In 1789 provided suits 'between State where suit brought, another State.'3 There shortly arose question corporation—a creature law—is deemed 'citizen' statute. This through Chief Marshall, initially responded negative, holding sue sued under statute if none shareholders co-citizen any opposing party. Bank Deveaux, Cranch 61, 38. 1844 itself ruled created it. Louisville, C. & C.R. Co. Letson, How. 497, 11 353. Ten years later, reached result approach. compromise destined endure over century,4 indulged fiction that, purposes, would conclusively presumed incorporating State. Marshall Baltimore O.R. Co., 16 314, 14 953. 7 re-entered lists 1875, significantly expanding deleting requirement imposed one parties must forum State.5 resulting increase quantity litigation, however, cooled enthusiasts 1887 1888 enacted sharp curbs. quadrupled jurisdictional amount, confined right removal nonresident defendants, reinstituted protections against collusive assignment, narrowed venue.6 8 climate 1889 decided supra. own motion observed plaintiff joint stock company natural person. held endowed New York capacity sue, could considered purposes. U.S., at 682, S.Ct., 427.7 recent courts commentators reflected dissatisfaction rule Barney.8 distinction 'personality' 'citizenship' unions other associations, increasingly argued, has become artificial unreal. mere fact birth certificate is, they say, consequence. truth fact, point out, many voluntary are indistinguishable terms reality function structure, say latter juridical persons 'citizens' former base inadequate irrelevant difference. They assert, considerable merit, good administration, nor fair, remit association vagaries determined disregard may exist identity local habitation their own. 10 force these arguments relation particularized petitioner's showing case. Petitioner argues underlying jurisdiction—protection litigant prejudice—is especially applicable modern union. According argument, when defendant major union, juries tempted favor interests expense. Juries also influenced fear unionization adversely affect economy community customs practices field race relations. support contentions, petitioner exhibited material organizational campaigns like involved case, localities been saturated propaganda concerning such economic racial fears. Extending unions, says petitioner, make available advantages procedure, III judges less exposed pressures than court counterparts, selected wider geographical areas, review appellate reflecting multistate perspective, effective We view arguments, however appealing, addressed inappropriate forum, pleas extension jurisdicton hitherto uncovered broad categories litigants ought made 12 urges People Puerto Rico Russell 288 476, 53 447, 77 903, heretofore breached doctrinal wall Barney and, step having taken, there now necessity enlisting assistance Congress. does furnish precedent seeks. problem presented fitting exotic creation civil law, sociedad en comandita, into scheme knew not. Organic Act Pureto conferred all on either side controversy foreign 'citizens State, Territory, domiciled Porto Rico.'9 All sociedad's nonresidents Rico, lay 'parties' action. itself, members, party, doing basis help did because, Stone stated '(t)he tradition expressed Code Rico,' consistently regarded person.' 480—481, 448—449. Accordingly, sociedad, within meaning Act, ordered insular should effect contract Rico.10 If accept urgent invitation amend accommodate faced difficulties resolve. Even record here adequate, well hesitate assume situation sufficiently representative typical form predicate general principle. should, example, obliged fashion test ascertaining citizen. problem, incorporation candidate, arguable irrelevance policies being outweighed certainty application. even easy apparent solution dispose problem; 1958 thought necessary enact legislation providing both located.11 Further, contemplating claim, acutely aware complications arising circumstance organizations these, perhaps, reckoned connection incidents.12 Whether assimilated status how determined, related rules apply, decisions suited branch, regardless our views intrinsic merits argument—merits stoutly attested widespread recognition personalities.13 below. 28 U.S.C. 1441(a) (1964 ed.) 'Except otherwise expressly Congress, district original division embracing pending.' challenge Appeals' finding respect absence Mention omitted 'statement case' portion brief. Instead, expresses intention, remand raise issue—that libel conduct exclusive National Labor Relations Board subject least initially, Compare Linn Plant Guard Workers America, Local 114, 337 68 (C.A.6th Cir.), cert. 381 923, 1558, Meyer Joint Council 53, Intern'l Bro. Teamsters, etc., 416 Pa. 401, 206 A.2d 382, petition dismissed Rule 60, 897, 193. Stat. 78. See 72 415 (1958), 1332(c), that: 'For section 1441 title, incorporated business.' 18 470. 24 552, 553, amended 25 434. historical background changes see generally, Moore Weckstein, Diversity Jurisdiction: Past, Present, Future, 43 Tex.L.Rev. (1964); Corporations Citizenship A Supreme Fiction Revisited, Harv.L.Rev. 1426 Hart Wechsler, Courts System 891—943 (1953). Equally responsive congressional intent manifested Court's 1892 Shaw Quincy Mining 444, 935, 36 768, incorporation, though elsewhere. Mason American Express 334 392 (C.A.2d Cir.); 78 1661 (1965); Geo.L.J. 513 65 Col.L.Rev. 162 Fed. Musicians Stein, 213 679, 685—689 denied, 348 873, 75 108, 99 687, suggesting trial find purposes—a suggestion rejected remand, 183 F.Supp. (D.C.M.D.Tenn.); Van Sant 169 355 (C.A.3d Comment, 1965 Duke LJ. 329; Note, Unions Juridicial Persons, 66 Yale L.J. 712, 742—749 (1957). Cf. Swan First Church Christ, Scientist, Boston, 225 745 (C.A.9th Cir.). Brocki 279 785 364 871, 81 113, 92; Underwood Maloney, 256 358 864, 79 93, 97; A. Bull Steamship N.M.E.B.A., 250 332 takes conventional view. had 'of cases cognizable States' controversies subjects States, *,' 41, 1917, 39 965 (now 48 863). 70 658 (1956), amending 1332, relating treatment Commonwealth As Russell, 482, 449, prevent organizing sociedads carry then 'remove law.' Second Mason, F.2d, 397, n. 8, seems assert broadening do agree. At decided, 'State' recognized avail note 4, Law Institute proposed places located, disabled initiating litigation maintain 'local establishments.' ALI, Study Division Jurisdiction Between Courts, Proposed Final Draft (1965), §§ 1301(b)(2) 1302(b). 29 185(c), actions proceedings organization (1) maintains office, (2) duly authorized officers agents engaged representing acting employee members.' See, e.g., Mines America Coronado Coal 259 344, 42 570, 975; 17(b) Fed.Rules Civ.Proc; Study, supra; Moore, Practice 17.25 (2d ed., 1964); Juridical 712 445 (1964), 1332(c) confer insurers, 'whether unincorporated,' direct-action suits; Developments Law—Judicial Control Actions Private Associations, 76 983, 1080—1100 (1963).

Category: 8