Harik

Harik v. California Teachers Ass'n

Good Law
298 F.3d 863·2002 WL 1766654
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 1, 2002Nos. 01-15590, 01-15688 and 01-15705California3,514 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Schroeder, J.

The most significant issue we must decide in these consolidated appeals is what financial information unions must provide to non-members, in an agency shop, in order to support the amount of the agency fee. See Chicago Teachers Union, Local No. 1 v. Hudson, 475 U.S. 292 , 106 S.Ct. 1066 , 89 L.Ed.2d 232 (1986). We specifically address whether the statement of the union’s expenditures benefitting all members of the bargaining unit and hence chargeable to non-members must always be an audited statement. The district court held that it must be audited. The smallest of the defendant unions in this case, the Dinuba Teachers Association (DTA), challenges that ruling, contending that unaudited statements signed under penalty of perjury, coupled with an opportunity to examine the union’s checkbook, suffice.

We hold that, while a formal audit is not required, the union must provide a statement of its chargeable and nonchargeable expenses, together with an independent verification that the expenses were actually incurred. We reverse the district court to the extent that its ruling is inconsistent with our holding. We also reverse the district court’s ruling that the school superintendents…

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.