The NLRB Creates A New Defense


A federal district court in Washington has struck down an NLRB petition for a Section 10(j) injunction because the NLRB lacked a valid quorum at the time the petition was authorized.  In Hooks v. Kitsap Tenant Support Services[1], Judge Benjamin Settle ruled that the NLRB General Counsel's request for immediate injunctive relief against an employer could not proceed in light of the "persuasive" legal analysis of the three Circuit Courts of Appeal that have found the recess appointment of NLRB Members Block and Griffin to be invalid[2].

In light of the recent Senate confirmation of a full five member NLRB, the Kitsap decision would seem to be little more than a footnote to the recess appointment dispute.  However, Judge Settle went on to consider the NLRB General Counsel's alternative argument that the injunction should go forward notwithstanding the alleged invalidly appointed NLRB.  The General Counsel contended that Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon had legal authority to bring the injunctive proceeding (through Regional Director Hooks).  Specifically, Hooks claimed that Solomon was appropriately appointed pursuant to the Federal Vacancies Reform Act ("FVRA"). 

Judge Settle disagreed, ruling that Solomon was not validly appointed by President Obama because Solomon had not previously served as the personal assistant to the departing officer.  Accordingly, Judge Settle found that the underlying administrative complaint upon which the NLRB sought an injunction was not validly issued.

Although no other federal court has so ruled, this decision might encourage other employers to challenge even the issuance of NLRB administrative complaints under the FVRA. Thus, the NLRB, in its zeal to defend its right to proceed, may have given employers an entirely new defense. 

[1] In Hooks v. Kitsap Tenant Support Services, Case No. C13-5470 (W.D. WA August 13, 2013).

[2] See e.g.  Noel Canning v. NLRB, 705 F.3d 490 (DC Cir. 2013) petition for cert. granted NLRB v. Noel Canning, et al., 12-1281 (June 24, 2013).

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Sherman & Howard L.L.C. | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Sherman & Howard L.L.C. on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.