Local No. 438 Construction and General Laborers' Union v. Curry

Supreme Court of the United States · 1963 · Federal Courts

Federal CourtsSupreme Court appellate jurisdictionLabor law preemptionFinal judgmentNLRA preemptionNLRB exclusive jurisdictionarguable § 8(b) violationstate court injunction

Facts

Respondents, nonunion contractors working on a City of Atlanta construction project, were required by contract to pay wages conforming to those paid on similar work in the Atlanta area. After unsuccessful efforts by unions to have respondents raise wages, petitioner union placed a single peaceful picket at the site, and employees of other contractors refused to work while deliveries became difficult, slowing construction and causing layoffs. Respondents sued in Georgia court, alleging that the picketing aimed to force them to hire only union labor in violation of Georgia's right-to-work statute. It was stipulated that respondents had purchased more than $50,000 worth of goods and commodities from outside Georgia.

Issue

First, whether the Supreme Court could review under 28 U.S.C. § 1257 a Georgia judgment authorizing only a temporary injunction. Second, whether Georgia courts had power to enjoin the union's picketing when the allegations and findings made out at least an arguable unfair labor practice under § 8(b) of the National Labor Relations Act.

Rule

When the allegations and state-court findings show at least an arguable violation of § 8(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the controversy lies within the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board, and state courts may not adjudicate it or issue an injunction. A state-court judgment that finally asserts such jurisdiction is reviewable as a final judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 1257 when the jurisdictional issue is separable from the merits and effectively conclusive, even if the order is framed as a temporary injunction.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Birmingham, a nonunion drywall contractor, Red Clay Interiors, is picketed peacefully by members of Metro Trades Council after the contractor rejects the council's demand that it use only workers referred by union hiring halls. The contractor buys more than $80,000 in materials from Tennessee and Florida, and several delivery drivers for unrelated subcontractors refuse to cross the picket line.

If the contractor sues in Alabama state court for an injunction under a state right-to-work statute, what is the strongest argument against state-court jurisdiction?

Explanation. The majority held that when the complaint and findings make out at least an arguable violation of § 8(b), the controversy is within the exclusive power of the NLRB. A state court therefore lacks authority to adjudicate the dispute or issue even a temporary injunction. The key is arguable federal coverage, not a definitive unfair-labor-practice finding.