Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=919143
 
 

Footnotes (164)



 


 



Union Immunity from Suit in New York


Mitchell H. Rubinstein


New York Law School; Rutgers University School of Management and Labor Relations


New York University Journal of Law and Business, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 641-682, Summer 2006

Abstract:     
One of the best keep secrets in New York law is that most labor unions are immune from legal liability simply because they are organized as an unincorporated association. In jurisdictions such as New York, which follow common law, unions have this immunity because plaintiffs cannot met the stringent common law pleading requirements applicable to unincorporated associations, to wit, it must be alleged, and ultimately established, that the conduct complained of was approved of and ratified by each and every member of the association. Thus, the form in which a labor union is organized has a significant impact on its potential for legal liability. This is reminiscent of the forms of actions utilized in the Middle Ages where the form of the action determined whether a party had any remedy.

This Article surveys union liability in this important and little understood area of law. It concludes that the common law pleading requirements of Martin v. Curran make little sense today, particularly when applied to labor unions. Public policy is certainly not furthered by blind obedience to an ancient common law doctrine.

Surprisingly, there is no academic commentary which address this important issue under New York law or the seminal case in this area, Martin v. Curran. However, Martin v. Curran continues to be relied upon in order to dismiss cases against unions even though this case has been severely criticized by a number of courts. Just recently, the First Department upheld the dismissal of a tort action against a union because the common law pleading requirements of Martin v. Curran could not be met. That 2006 decision generated a significant dissent by Justice Saxe, who stated that this dated rule should be abandoned. Salemeh v. Toussaint, 25 A.D. 3d 411 (1st Dept. 2006)(Saxe, J., dissenting).

Number of Pages in PDF File: 42

Keywords: labor law, duty of fair representation, martin v. curran, unions, new york law

JEL Classification: K31, K41, J50, J51, J53, J58

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: July 26, 2006  

Suggested Citation

Rubinstein, Mitchell H., Union Immunity from Suit in New York. New York University Journal of Law and Business, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 641-682, Summer 2006. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=919143

Contact Information

Mitchell H. Rubinstein (Contact Author)
New York Law School ( email )
52 Broadway, 9th Floor
New York, NY 10004
United States
212-533-6300 (Phone)
212-995-2347 (Fax)
HOME PAGE: http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/adjunctprofs/
Rutgers University School of Management and Labor Relations ( email )
New Brunswick, NJ
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 933
Downloads: 93
Download Rank: 158,803
Footnotes:  164
Paper comments
No comments have been made on this paper

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.343 seconds