| 25-5701 |
William Scales v. Hotel Trades Council of New York Local 6 |
Second Circuit |
2025-09-23 |
Denied |
IFP |
arbitration-rights constitutional-violation employment-contract fair-business-practices freedom-of-speech union-representation |
Did The Hotel and Motel Trades Council, Violate the Constitution of
The United States of America, by not allowing Mr Scales the plaintiff,
freedom o… |
| 24-1101 |
Ali Bahreman v. Allegiant Air, LLC, et al. |
Ninth Circuit |
2025-04-23 |
Denied |
Response Waived |
collective-bargaining duty-of-fair-representation employee-rights labor-organization railway-labor-act union-representation |
1. Do a union and employer violate § 2, Fourth by requiring non-members to financially support a union in a manner not authorized by § 2, Eleventh (a)… |
| 24-709 |
Kirk E. Knopp v. CSX Transportation Inc. |
Sixth Circuit |
2025-01-03 |
Denied |
Response Waived |
first-amendment notice-requirements railway-labor-act social-media-policy summary-judgment union-representation |
Whether indirect notice to an employee by a union representative satisfies 45 U.S.C. § 153, First (j) (reproduced at Pet. App. 17a), when the union ma… |
| 24-71 |
Avraham Goldstein, et al. v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al. |
Second Circuit |
2024-07-23 |
Denied |
Amici (12)Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) |
anti-semitism compelled-association exclusive-representation expressive-activities first-amendment free-speech freedom-of-association religious-freedom state-prohibition union union-representation |
Whether it violates the First Amendment for a state to prohibit individuals from dissociating from a union's representation to protest that union's ex… |
| 22-6336 |
James C. Tate v. United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union Local 8363 |
Fifth Circuit |
2022-12-19 |
Denied |
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP |
civil-procedure civil-rights discrimination discrimination-claim district-court-discretion due-process employment-law standing summary-judgment summary-motion union-representation |
1. Did the District Court's discretion deny the petitioner due process?
2. Did the District Court in considering the facts presented in the summary m… |
| 22-220 |
Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen |
Fifth Circuit |
2022-09-09 |
Denied |
Amici (2) |
antiunion-animus arbitration-procedures circuit-split collective-bargaining mandatory-arbitration railway-labor-act statutory-interpretation union-representation union-representatives |
The Railway Labor Act ("RLA") prohibits carriers from interfering with their employees' "choice of representatives." 45 U.S.C. § 152 Third. Union Paci… |
| 21-5510 |
Prayed v. Department of Labor, et al. |
Ninth Circuit |
2021-08-27 |
Denied |
Response WaivedIFP |
civil-rights constitutional-rights due-process first-amendment free-speech labor-management labor-management-relations lmrda lmrda-interpretation procedural-due-process standing union-representation |
In this case specifically, has the Petitioner's substantive rights been abridged, a violation of 28 USC 2072 (b), by the Court rules and procedures ef… |
| 20-1574 |
Joseph Ocol v. Chicago Teachers Union, et al. |
Seventh Circuit |
2021-05-13 |
Denied |
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) |
compelled-speech constitutional-rights exclusive-bargaining exclusive-bargaining-representative first-amendment freedom-of-association janus-precedent janus-v-afscme public-employee public-sector-unions union-representation |
1. In Minnesota State Board for Community Colleges v. Knight, 465 U.S. 271 (1984), this Court held that the First Amendment allows States to compel pu… |
| 20-1458 |
Jon L. Bryan v. American Airlines, Inc., et al. |
First Circuit |
2021-04-19 |
Denied |
|
administrative-law administrative-procedure civil-procedure duty-of-fair-representation grievance-procedure grievance-withdrawal labor-law statute-of-limitations union-representation |
Whether the court erred by ruling that a union member's duty of fair representation claim, filed two months after the union's withdrawal of his 19-yea… |
| 20-1378 |
Linda Rizzo-Rupon, et al. v. International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO District 141, Local 914, et al. |
Third Circuit |
2021-04-01 |
Denied |
|
agency-fees first-amendment janus-v-afscme private-sector-employees railway-labor-act state-action union-representation |
1. Does this Court's recent First Amendment agency fee ban announced in Janus v. AFSCME, 138 S.Ct. 2448 (2018), apply to matters involving private-sec… |
| 19-7607 |
Jon P. Westrum v. National Labor Relations Board |
Eighth Circuit |
2020-02-07 |
Denied |
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP |
alter-ego-doctrine civil-rights due-process labor-dispute labor-law legal-standing sole-proprietorship statute-of-limitations time-bar union-representation |
(1) a one man shop cannot be represented by the union, (see Stack Electric decision).
(2) the 6 month time bar had lapsed, (see transcripts).
(3) th… |
| 19-51 |
Ben Branch, et al. v. Massachusetts Department of Labor Relations, et al. |
Massachusetts |
2019-07-08 |
Denied |
Amici (2)Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) |
bargaining-representative civil-rights compelled-speech constitutional-rights due-process exclusive-representation first-amendment free-speech political-activity political-autonomy public-employee state-action union-representation |
When a public employee union uses its government-granted authority as employees' exclusive bargaining representative to compel employees to choose bet… |
| 18-1492 |
Katherine Miller v. Jay Inslee, Governor of Washington, et al. |
Ninth Circuit |
2019-05-29 |
Denied |
Amici (3)Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) |
associational-freedom childcare-providers civil-rights compulsory-representation due-process exclusive-representation first-amendment free-speech freedom-of-association labor-relations mandatory-representation public-policy state-mandated-representation state-policy union-representation |
The Court recently held that a state "requir[ing] that a union serve as exclusive bargaining agent for its employees [is] itself a significant impinge… |