Court Opinion

ID: 9464137
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 23:25:54.096265+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:38:28.540024
License: Public Domain

FIELD, Senior Circuit Judge,
concurring specially:
I would be hard put to take issue with Judge Russell’s thorough review and conclusions in this case, but I am somewhat concerned about the apparent indifference of the district court to the exhaustion provision of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. § 411(a)(4).
While I agree that whether exhaustion is to be excused lies within the discretion of the trial court and does not present an issue for the jury, I think an explicit ruling should have been made by the district judge. “The Congressionally approved policy of first permitting unions to correct their own wrongs is rooted in the desire to stimulate labor organizations to take the initiative and independently to establish honest and democratic procedures,”1 and the exhaustion provision should not be treated as a mere procedural detail. See Wiglesworth v. Teamsters Loc. Union No. 592, 552 F.2d 1027 (4 Cir. 1976).

. Detroy v. American Guild of Variety Artists, 286 F.2d 75, 79 (2 Cir. 1961).