Harik

Harik v. California Teachers Ass'n

Good Law
326 F.3d 1042·2003 WL 1873736
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 15, 2003Nos. 01-15590, 01-15688, 01-15705California3,765 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Schroeder, J.

ORDER WITHDRAWING OPINION, FILING OPINION AND DENYING REHEARING AND OPINION

ORDER

The panel opinion filed August 1, 2002, is withdrawn and the attached Opinion is ORDERED filed.

The panel as constituted above has otherwise voted to deny the petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc.

The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no judge of the court has requested a vote on the petition for rehearing en banc. Fed. R.App. P. 35(b).

The petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED.

OPINION

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 specifi *1046 cally 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…

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.