Anthony Henry v. Laborers Local 1191
Michigan Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partZahra, J.
Though I join the majority’s opinion in Parts I, II, 111(A), (C), and (D), and IV(B), I write separately to dissent from Parts III(B) and IV(A) and the outcome of the case. I agree with the majority’s conclusion that the *298Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act1 does not preempt plaintiffs’ Whistleblowers’ Protection Act (WPA)2 claims. But I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA)3 does not preempt plaintiffs’ WPA claims. I conclude that plaintiffs’ WPA claims are arguably subject to the NLRA because plaintiffs’ reporting of…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- San Diego Building Trades Council v. GarmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Lingle v. Norge Division of Magic Chef, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Linn v. United Plant Guard Workers of America, Local 114Supreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Farmer v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Local 25Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. San Diego County District Council of CarpentersSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.