AMERCO

AMERCO v. National Labor Relations Board

Good Law
458 F.3d 883
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 10, 2006No. 04-16389California3,515 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wardlaw, J.

We must address a question that we have never explicitly addressed: whether a district court has jurisdiction to enjoin an ongoing unfair labor practices hearing when one party asserts that it has not been accorded all the process it is due. Because the answer is squarely controlled by Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp., 303 U.S. 41 , 58 S.Ct. 459 , 82 L.Ed. 638 (1938), we affirm the district court’s order dismissing the Appellants’ motion for a preliminary injunction based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In accordance with Myers and all of our sister circuits that have considered this question, we hold that the petition for review process detailed in the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 160 (f), which authorizes appellate court review of final decisions by the National Labor Relations Board, is the exclusive mechanism for federal court review of decisions made in unfair labor practice hearings.

I.

In 2003, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) initiated a complaint *885 against U-Haul of Nevada (“U-Haul”) for alleged unfair labor practices aimed at preventing unionization and punishing pro-union activities at two truck repair facilities in Nevada. The…

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.