Holt v. Mead Truck Renting Corp. — 228 A.D.2d 476

Majority

p. 476

William Holt, Plaintiff, v Mead Truck Renting Corp. et al., Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Union Local 138, Third-Party Defendant-Appellant.

[643 NYS2d 679]

p. 477

There is no merit to the appellant’s contention that the claims raised in the third-party complaint are preempted by the National Labor Relations Act ( 29 USC § 151 et seq.). There exists a "significant state interest in protecting the [plaintiff] from the challenged conduct”, and "although the challenged conduct occurred in the course of a labor dispute * * * the exercise of state jurisdiction over the tort claim entail[s] little risk of interference with the regulatory jurisdiction of the [National] Labor [Relations] Board” (Sears, Roebuck & Co. v Carpenters, 436 US 180 , 196; see, Farmer v Carpenters, 430 US 290 ). Since the State tort action can be decided without consideration of the labor conflict, jurisdiction lies in State court (see, Farmer v Carpenters, supra; Betts v University of Rochester, 123 AD2d 496 ).

The appellant’s remaining contentions lack merit. Mangano, P. J., Sullivan, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cases cited

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. San Diego County District Council of Carpenters 436 US 180 SCOTUS 1978-05-15 at 196 p. 477
Farmer v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Local 25 430 US 290 SCOTUS 1977-03-07 p. 477
Betts v. University of Rochester 123 AD2d 496 N.Y. App. Div. 1986-09-26 p. 477