Vela, A. v. Irwin

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an employee’s claim against a union for wrongfully interfering with the relationship between him and his employer was preempted by the NLRA
• applying that rule even though the complaint was not framed in unfair labor practice terms
• stating that NLRA “pre-empts state and federal court jurisdiction to remedy conduct that is arguably protected or prohibited by the Act”
• holding that a showing of discriminatory 6 conduct requires “substantial evidence of discrimination that is intentional, severe, and 7 unrelated to union objectives,” and a showing of bad faith requires “substantial evidence 8 of fraud, deceitful action or dishonest conduct”
• noting that, with respect to union-security clauses, “federal concern is pervasive and its regulation complex”
• noting that, with respect to union-security clauses, “federal concern is pervasive and its regulation complex”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).