Legal Opinion

Phillip D. Bertelsen, Inc. v. Agricultural Labor Relations Board

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 23, 1994No. F018964PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

VARTABEDIAN, J.

Introduction

At the times relevant to this case, it was settled law under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) 1 and the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) 2 that nonagricultural workers were not entitled to remedial backpay during any period when they were not present in the United States. (Sure-Tan, Inc. v. NLRB (1984) 467 U.S. 883, 903 [81 L.Ed.2d 732, 750, 104 S.Ct. 2803].) (The NLRA does not apply to agricultural workers. (29 U.S.C. § 152(3).))

Prior to Sure-Tan, the immigration status of a worker made no difference in the available remedies under the NLRA.…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. National Labor Relations Board v. Transportation Management Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Sure-Tan, Inc. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Hacienda HotelCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
  4. In Re KellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Mendoza v. Wight Vineyard ManagementCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Cook v. State Farm General Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API