Granite Rock Company v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters

Free Trial / Sign Up

Products / Prices / Samples

About Us / Contact

FAQs

Home

Latest employment law cases
Summaries and links to full text

Emailed directly to you
and online all the time

Latest Cases

Key Word Search

Law Firm Directory

Arbitrator Directory

Law School Directory

Legal Resources / Memos

United States Supreme Court Employment Law Cases

All pending employment law cases - click here

Granite Rock Company v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters (08-1214)
LMRA Section 301 suit: tortious interference and duty to arbitrate

The employer sued a local union and an international union under Labor Management Relations Act Section 301(a) claiming that (1) the international union tortiously interfered with a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the employer and the local union, and (2) the local union breached the CBA by going on strike. The employer and the local union had reached a tentative new CBA which contained a broad arbitration clause and a no-strike clause. The employer alleged that the local union had ratified the CBA and then engaged in a strike which was in part led by a high official of the international union.

(1) The 9th Circuit held that the employer failed to state a claim against the international union because the tortious interference claim did not "arise under" the CBA between the employer and the local. The court reasoned that because the international "has no rights or duties under the agreement … [the employer’s] tortious interference claim … does not meet the requirements of section 301(a)."

(2) As to the contract claim, the parties disagreed on the date of ratification. The district court held that issues of breach and damages had to be arbitrated, but that the issue of contract ratification was for the court to decide. The 9th Circuit held that the entire dispute should go to arbitration under the contract's arbitration clause, which covered "all disputes arising under this agreement." The court held that both parties consented to arbitration; the employer by suing under the contract, and the union by moving to compel arbitration.

The US Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the 9th Circuit's judgment.

Case below: Granite Rock Company v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 546 F.3d 1169 (9th Cir 10/22/2008)
Official docket sheet
Certiorari granted June 29, 2009.
Oral argument: January 19, 2010.

Question presented:

1. Does a federal court have jurisdiction to determine whether a collective bargaining agreement was formed when it is disputed whether any binding contract exists, but no party makes an independent challenge to the arbitration clause apart from claiming it is inoperative before the contract is established?
2. Does Section 301(a) of the Labor- Management Relations Act, which generally preempts otherwise available state law causes of action, provide a cause of action against an international union that is not a direct signatory to the collective bargaining agreement, but effectively displaces its signatory local union and causes a strike breaching a collective bargaining agreement for its own benefit?

Certiorari Documents:

Briefs on the merits:

Counsel:

For Petitioner: Garry George Mathiason; Littler Mendelson; 650 California St., 20th Fl; San Francisco, CA 94108; (415) 433-1940.

For Respondent Teamsters Local 287: Duane B. Beeson; Beeson, Tayer & Bodine; 1404 Franklin St., 5th Floor; Oakland, CA 94612; (510) 625-9700.

For Respondent International Brotherhood of Teamsters: Peter David Nussbaum; Altshuler Berzon LLP; 177 Post St., Suite 300; San Francisco, CA 94108; pnussbaum@altshulerberzon.com; (415) 421-7151.