Breazeale v. Southwest Airline Pilot's Association
ORDER Denying without prejudice Plaintiff's 4 Motion for TRO. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 10/12/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Case No. 2:17-cv-02594-RFB-CWH
Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary
SOUTHWEST AIRLINE PILOT’S
ASSOCIATION; DOES 1-20; ROE CORPS.
Before the Court is Plaintiff William Breazeale (“Plaintiff”)’s Motion for Temporary
Restraining Order (“TRO”). (ECF No. 4). For the reasons stated below, the Court DENIES
Plaintiff filed a Complaint on October 5, 2017, against Defendant Southwest Airline Pilot’s
Association (“SWAPA”), alleging violations of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure
Act (“LMRDA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 481 and 411. (ECF No. 1). Plaintiff asserts a breach of contract
cause of action, and a breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing cause of action,
alleging that SWAPA has violated the SWAPA Constitution and Bylaws and Policy Manual in the
recent election for Las Vegas Domicile Representative. Plaintiff also filed the instant Motion for
TRO on October 5, 2017. (ECF No. 4). Plaintiff asks the Court to enjoin and restrain SWAPA
from allowing SWAPA Las Vegas Domicile Representative Candidate Matt Kenworthy
(“Kenworthy”) from appearing on the ballot for upcoming SWAPA Las Vegas Domicile
Representative Election, which opened on October 6, 2017. Plaintiff claims that Kenworthy
appears on the ballot in violation of SWAPA Election Rules.
Plaintiff’s counsel declared that he contacted SWAPA’s 2nd Vice President, Tom
Gasparolo (“Gasparolo”), on October 5, 2017, to inform Gasparolo about Plaintiff’s Complaint
being filed and Plaintiff’s intention to file for a TRO. (ECF No. 4 at 4). Plaintiff’s counsel also left
a message for SWAPA’s legal counsel informing her of the TRO. (ECF No. 4 at 4). In the Motion,
Plaintiff describes his efforts to discuss the alleged violation of the SWAPA Election Rules and
LMRDA with Gasparolo in September 2017. (ECF No. 4 at 6-8). Plaintiff claims that these efforts
constituted a “formal complaint.” However, the Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to exhaust the
procedures required by LMRDA and cases interpreting the statute. See 29 U.S.C. § 482 (laying
out procedures for enforcement). Only the Secretary of Labor may bring a cause of action in
federal court for violations of Title IV of LMRDA. Id. Prior to the Secretary of Labor filing suit,
a plaintiff must first lodge a complaint internally and exhaust all internal administrative remedies
available pursuant to the constitution and bylaws of plaintiff’s union. Id. Plaintiff may then file a
complaint with the Secretary of Labor, who conducts an investigation and has the authority to
bring suit. See Local No. 82, Furniture & Piano Moving v. Crowley, 467 U.S. 526, 539-540 (1984).
Therefore, the Court denies the Motion without prejudice, with leave to refile subject to
the exhaustion of administrative remedies. Under Crowley, once the proper procedures are
followed, the Court has the authority to “invalidate an election already held, and order the
Secretary to supervise a new election, only if the violation of Title IV may have affected the
outcome of the previous election.” 467 U.S. at 540.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (ECF
No. 4) is DENIED without prejudice.
DATED this 12th day of October, 2017.
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?