International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW-CIO) v. Russell (1957)
- Docket
- 21
- Decided
- 1957-01-01
- Category
- General
Summary
Question: (1) Does a state court have jurisdiction over an action by a non-union employee against a union and its agent, for malicious interference with the employee’s lawful occupation during a strike? (2) Was the jury’s $10,000.00 verdict excessive? Conclusion: Yes and no. Justice Harold Burton, writing for a 6-2 majority, reiterated the Supreme Court’s decision in United Construction Workers v. Laburnum Corp. , which held that Congress did not give the National Labor Relations Board exclusive jurisdiction over a common-law tort for damages. Justice Burton noted that, although the National Labor Relations Board had the authority to award back pay to Russell, that authority did not remove Russell’s right to sue the union for damages in state court. The Court held that cutting off an employee’s right to sue a union would, in effect, grant unions substantial immunity from any consequences resulting from mass picketing or coercion. Finally, the Court held that the $10,000.00 verdict was not excessive in this case. Chief Justice Earl Warren dissented, stating that, when Congress passed the Labor Management Act, it was attempting to balance the competing interests of employees, unions, and management. By allowing additional remedies, Justice Warren argued that the Supreme Court upset that balance. Justice William O. Douglas joined in this dissent. Justice Hugo Black did not participate in this decision.