Retail Property Trust v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America

In this case we must decide whether § 303 of the Labor Management Relations Act (“LMRA”), codified at 29 U.S.C. § 187 , preempts state-law claims for trespass and private nuisance related to union conduct that may also constitute secondary boycott activity. Following the reasoning of Local 20, Teamsters, Chauffeurs & Helpers Union v. Morton, 377 U.S. 252 , 84 S.Ct. 1253 , 12 L.Ed.2d 280 (1964), Lodge 76, Int’l Ass’n of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO v. Wis. Empl. Relations Comm’n, 427 U.S. 132 , 96 S.Ct. 2548 , 49 L.Ed.2d 396 (1976), and Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. San Diego Cnty. Dist. Council of Carpenters, 436 U.S. 180 , 98 S.Ct. 1745 , 56 L.Ed.2d 209 (1978), we hold that federal law does not so thoroughly occupy the field that it always preempts such claims, nor does it conflict with the state law claims presented here. Where, as in this case, state claims of trespass and nuisance “touch[ ] interests deeply rooted in local feeling and responsibility,” Belknap, Inc. v. Hale, 463 U.S. 491, 498 , 103 S.Ct. 3172 , 77 L.Ed.2d 798 (1983), and the plaintiff seeks only to enforce time, place, and manner restrictions against union protesters, “we are unwilling to…