Teamsters for a Democratic Union v. Secretary, Department of Labor

810 F.2d 301, 258 U.S. App. D.C. 182, 124 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2648, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 1734
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided February 6, 1987·No. 86-5225·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinions

Opinion for the Court PER CURIAM.

Concurring opinion filed by Circuit Judge HARRY T. EDWARDS.

PER CURIAM:

We affirm the judgment of the District Court, see Teamsters for a Democratic Union v. Secretary of Labor, 629 F.Supp. 665 (D.D.C.1986), for the reasons stated in the court’s opinion. As the District Court found, the appellants are essentially challenging delegate eligibility requirements for national conventions to elect union officers under Title IV of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (the “Act”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 481-483 (1982). Accordingly, the appellants are limited to the post-election remedies provided in section 402 of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 482 (1982).

So ordered.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Teamsters for a Democratic Union v. Secretary, Department of Labor, 810 F.2d 301, 258 U.S. App. D.C. 182, 124 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2648, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 1734 (D.C. Cir. 1987).

810 F.2d 301 (Teamsters for a Democratic Union v. Secretary, Department of Labor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related