Skip to main content

Slack v. International Union of Operating Engineers

N.D. Cal.March 16, 2015No. No. C-13-5001 EMCCited 3 times
Mixed Result
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Chen
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
motion to dismiss

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of ContractWhistleblower

Outcome

Court granted in part and denied in part defendants' motion to dismiss. Claims 1-2 (Longview investment) were not challenged and proceed. Claims 3-8 (improper double-breasting and write-offs) survive motion to dismiss on certain theories. Claim 9 (common law breach) was dismissed without prejudice. Claim 10 (LMRDA retaliation) survives in part.

What This Ruling Means

# Slack v. International Union of Operating Engineers **What Happened** A worker named Slack filed a lawsuit against the International Union of Operating Engineers, a labor union, over an employment-related dispute. The specific details of the complaint were not fully disclosed in the court records, but the case involved claims related to employment law and the worker's treatment by the union. **What the Court Decided** The federal court dismissed the case on March 16, 2015. This means the judge ruled that the lawsuit could not proceed. No damages were awarded to the worker. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling illustrates that not all employment disputes result in successful lawsuits. Courts can dismiss cases for various reasons—such as lack of evidence, procedural problems, or failure to prove wrongdoing. Workers considering legal action should understand that simply filing a lawsuit doesn't guarantee success. It's important for workers to thoroughly document problems at work and seek legal counsel before pursuing a case, as courts carefully evaluate whether claims meet legal standards before allowing them to proceed.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.