John A. Breda v. Alan M. Scott Galton, Popick & Scott

Good Law
1 F.3d 908·93 Daily Journal DAR 9925·1993 WL 286781·143 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3011·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 19743
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 3, 199391-36300California859 words

Opinion

Opinion

Farris, J.

John A. Breda brought suit against Alan M. Scott and Scott’s former law firm, Galton, Popick & Scott, for legal malpractice. The district court granted summary judgment for Scott, holding that the attorneys were immune from liability under 29 U.S.C. § 185 (b), Section 301(b) of the Labor Management Relations Act. Breda appeals.

We affirm.

We review a grant of summary judgment de novo. Tzung v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co., 873 F.2d 1338, 1339-40 (9th Cir.1989). Breda claims that Scott mishandled his union grievance over his discharge from the Oregon Symphony Association. Scott represented the Union at the arbitration of the grievance as he had in some 150 arbitrations over the previous eighteen years. The arbitrator upheld Breda’s discharge. Breda brought an unsuccessful action against the Symphony and the Union. He then filed this action for legal malpractice against Scott and his law firm.

Section 301(b) provides that “[a]ny money judgment against a labor organization ... shall not be enforceable against any individual member or his assets.” 29 U.S.C. § 185 (b). “When Congress passed § 301, it declared its view that only the union was to be made to respond for union…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.