Case Citator › San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon

San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Superseded by statute
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
359 U.S. 236
Decided
Confirmed treatments
2
Flagged citations read
135 of 135
Citing cases (total)
135
Treatment dates
1962–2022
Superseded by statute
A reviewed court treats this case as superseded by later legislation. San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon remains the general rule, subject to the two confirmed exceptions listed below. All 135 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

The Supreme Court held that a Section 301 contract suit can proceed in court despite an arguable unfair labor practice. A later federal statute also permits a RICO claim based on a specified labor law violation to proceed in court. Courts continue to apply Garmon's general rule and the exceptions it recognized for violence, peripheral matters, and deeply rooted local interests.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

135 later cases cite San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon; 135 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Superseded by statute

  • The court held that RICO's express inclusion of a labor law violation as a predicate permits the claim in federal court despite Garmon's rule of National Labor Relations Board jurisdiction.

    General Motors, LLC v. FCA US, LLC · Sixth Circuit · filed

    FCA argues that Garmon preemption applies. But Trollinger did not address the question here—whether, by expressly designating § 186 as a RICO predicate, Congress “has expressly carved out an exception to the” NLRB’s jurisdiction. Brennan, 973 F.2d at 646. We hold that it has. Accordingly, GM’s claims were properly before the district court.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Limited

  • The Court refused to apply Garmon's primary-jurisdiction doctrine to a Section 301 contract suit, even though the alleged conduct was an unfair labor practice.

    Smith v. Evening News Association · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    In Lucas Flour as well as in Atkinson the Court expressly refused to apply the pre-emption doctrine of the Garmon case; and we likewise reject that doctrine here where the alleged conduct of the employer, not only arguably, but concededly, is an unfair labor practice within the jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace