Jacqueline Tensing v. National Labor Relations Board
This text of 519 F.2d 365 (Jacqueline Tensing v. National Labor Relations Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Petitioners seek review of the refusal of the NLRB’s General Counsel to issue a complaint on charges filed before the Board. The Board has moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
We have held previously that district courts may not review the refusal of the Board’s General Counsel to investigate or to file a complaint concerning unfair labor practice charges, Mayer v. Ordman, 391 F.2d 889 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 925, 89 S.Ct. 257, 21 L.Ed.2d 261 (1968), adhering to the teaching of Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 171, 182, 87 S.Ct. 903, 913, 17 L.Ed.2d 842 (1967), that “the Board’s General Counsel has unreviewable discretion to refuse to institute an unfair labor practice complaint.”
This principle does not change because an aggrieved party files a petition for review in this Court rather than an action in District Court. We have no jurisdiction of the petition .for review, and it must be dismissed. Hernandez v. N. L. R. B., 505 F.2d 119 (5th Cir. 1974).
The petition for review is hereby dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
519 F.2d 365, 89 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jacqueline-tensing-v-national-labor-relations-board-ca6-1975.