Court Opinion

ID: 9547886
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 17:53:51.310376+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:18:11.534394
License: Public Domain

KAUS, J.
I concur in the court’s opinion. While I share Justice Richardson’s reservations on the issue of concurrent jurisdiction, I doubt that the problem can be solved by making the question of exclusive board jurisdiction depend on such rather vague tests as those announced in EDF I and EDF II. If a majority of the court were inclined to reconsider the issue, I would respectfully suggest that the exclusive jurisdiction of the board should be broadened to include disputes such as the present one. This would, obviously, involve the overruling of certain precedents on which plaintiffs justifiably relied. The new rule should, therefore, not be applicable to them.
Since, however, the requisite majority interest in reconsidering the question of concurrent jurisdiction is lacking, I join the court’s opinion.