Garrison, D. v. DOC

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that in enacting Title IV of the LMRDA, the “congressional concern was for the need to remedy abuses in union elections without departing needlessly from the longstanding congressional policy against unnecessary governmental interference with union affairs”
• espousing principle that exhaustion rule “must reflect the needs of rank and file union members”
• even if de minimus amount of union funds used to support candidacy is reimbursed to the union, section 401(g) violation exists
• “union member must, in some discernible fashion, indicate to his union his dissatisfaction with those facts if he is to meet the exhaustion requirement.”
• exhaustion requirement not met where member knew facts but did not include them in internal complaint
• “[C]ourts should impose a heavy burden on the union to show that it could not in any way discern that a member was complaining of the violation in question.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).