Hydrostorage, Inc. v. Northern California Boilermakers Local Joint Apprenticeship Committee

Good Law
891 F.2d 719·1989 WL 146285
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 6, 1989Nos. 88-2798, 88-2800, 88-2802, 88-2966, 88-2968 and 88-2969California6,676 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Wallace, J.

In these consolidated appeals, the Northern California Boilermakers Joint Local Apprenticeship Committee, California Apprenticeship Council, and California Division of Apprenticeship Standards (collectively Boilermakers) appeal from the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Hydrosto-rage, Inc. (Hydrostorage). The district court enjoined the enforcement of an administrative order against Hydrostorage, concluding that such enforcement was preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1144 (a), and by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), 29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq. On appeal, Boilermakers argue that the district court (1) lacked subject matter jurisdiction, (2) erred in failing to abstain under either the Younger or Pullman doctrines, and (3) erred in granting summary judgment based on ERISA and NLRA preemption. The district court exercised jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 . We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

I

This case arises out of California’s efforts to regulate apprenticeship on public works projects. California’s general administrative framework for regulating apprenticeships is…

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.