Litigation
This page provides all the dates and documents of our federal
civil-rights lawsuit to
fight "Fair Share". The suit is filed in US District Court,
Portland Maine (Case No. 2:05-cv-00112-GZS).
Our Case
Locke et al vs Karass et al , filed in Maine District Court, Portland on June 16, 2005. The suit alleges violations of Hudson and was filed by 20 state employees. Our attorneys are W. James Young of the National Right-to-Work Legal Defense Foundation and Stephen Whiting of the Whiting Law Firm in Portland. All documents are PDF files.The case was decided in favor of the union and appealed to the US Appeals Court in April 2006. The Appeals Court also found for the union, but clearly indicated a legal question was there which needed Supreme Court clarification.
The case was accepted for hearing by the US Supreme Court in February 2008. Oral arguments will happen sometime in the Fall of 2008. Documents for the Supreme Court case are at the bottom of this page.
Background information
National Labor Relations Act - allows forced union "fees", but also allows states to prohibit them.
Abood 1977 US Supreme Court decision upholding union "fees", but requiring unions to not force employees to pay for political expenses.
Hudson 1986 US Supreme Court decision further clarifying what unions cannot spend forced payments on. It also sets down requirements for proper notification to employees, and requires the objector/arbitration process in use now. Our case is based on alleged violations of this decision.
Lehnert 1991 US Supreme Court decision further clarifying proper and improper expenses for forced "fees".
Maine Supreme Court opinion allowing forced union "fees" in Maine (clarifies that Maine is not a right-to-work state).
Original Complaint, filed
June
16, 2005.
Complaint
(this outlines the actual claim
for the case)
" Union
Security" article
(Admin, P&T, SSU)
" Union
Security" article
(OMS)
April
11 mailing
Walo
email and docs
Answer to
complaint, filed July
11, 2005 - response of defendants Karass, Wyke, and Walo to the
complaint.
Answer
to complaint, filed July 22, 2005 - response of MSEA
Amended Complaint, filed
August 19, 2005 - this amends the class
definition and considers events occurring after June 16 filing.
Motion to file
amended complaint
Complaint
April 11
mailing, Walo email and docs (same as above)
June 10 MSEA
mailing
July 12 MSEA
mailing
Motion for preliminary injunction,
filed June 24, 2005 - this asks
the Court
to stop collection of the fee and/or termination of employees until the
case
is resolved.
Plaintiff's
motion for preliminary
injunction
Plaintiff's
memorandum in support
Supporting documentation
Supporting documentation
Counsel's
declaration in support
Opposition
to injunction ,
filed July 11, 2005 - response by defendants Karass, Wyke, and Walo to
request
for preliminary injunction. This document is very important
because in
it the State says they will NOT terminate any employees for failing to
pay a
service fee while this case is pending.
Opposition
to injunction ,
filed July 15, 2005 - response of MSEA. This is important because
much of MSEA's argument is included
in this document.
Plaintiff's
response to oppositions, filed July 22, 2005 - this responds to
defendants oppositions above
Order
denying preliminary injunction, filed August 2, 2005 by Judge
Singal
Transcript
of hearing for preliminary injunction, filed August 19, 2005 by
court transcriptionist - this records everything said during the
hearing.
Plaintiff's motion for class
certification, filed June 24, 2005 -
this asks
the Court to consider class-action status.
Plaintiff's
motion for
class certification
Plaintiff's
memorandum in
support
Opposition
to class certification,
filed July 11, 2005 - response of defendants Karass, Wyke, and Walo to
request
for class certification.
Opposition
to class certification, filed July 29, 2005 - response of MSEA
Plaintiff's
response to oppositions, filed August 1, 2005 - this responds to
the defendants' oppositions above
Declaration
A
Declaration
B
Plaintiff's
renewed motion, filed Nov 23, 2005
State's
opposition to renewed motion, filed Dec 12, 2005
MSEA's
opposition to renewed motion, filed Dec 14, 2005
Plaintiff's
reply to defendant's opposition, filed Dec 27, 2005
(Class certification is still pending)
Consent order regarding
confidentiality of bargaining materials
Request
for order, filed Nov 16, 2005
Consent
order, filed Nov 21, 2005
Discovery - various
documents related to the case and referred to elsewhere
MSEA April
11 2005 letter - the one that started it all
MSEA June
10 2005 letter
MSEA
June 10 2005 letter part 2
Runyon
Kersteen Oullette July 7 2005 letter
MSEA July 12
2005 letter - drops organizing costs
SEIU
correction letter, Sept 14, 2005 - corrects an SEIU expense report
Ken Walo
deposition, Nov 7, 2005 - head of Bureau of Employee Relations
Mark Myers
expert testimony report, Nov 21, 2005 - CPA with experience in
union accounting
Mary Labbe
declaration, Dec 13, 2005 - MSEA Systems Administrator
Runyon
Kersteen Oullette deposition, Dec 16, 2005 - MSEA accountants
Mark Myers
deposition, Dec 21, 2005
MSEA's answers
to plaintiff's interrogatories, Jan 17, 2006 - lots of good info in
here about MSEA
Plaintiff's
answers to MSEA's interrogatories, Jan 17, 2006
Tim Belcher
declaration, Jan 24, 2006 - MSEA executive director
Plaintiff's motion for summary
judgement - to settle the case immediately in favor of plaintiffs
Plaintiff's
motion, filed Jan 24, 2006
Plaintiff's
statement of facts, filed Jan 24, 2006
Plaintiff's
memorandum of law, filed Jan 24, 2006
MSEA
response, filed Feb 21, 2006
MSEA
response statement of facts, filed Feb 21, 2006
State's
response, filed Feb 21, 2006
MSEA's motion for summary judgement
- to dismiss the plaintiff's claims outright
MSEA's
motion, filed Jan 25, 2006
MSEA's
statement of facts, filed Jan 25, 2006
Plaintiff's
response, filed Feb 21, 2006
Plaintiff's
opposition to State's statement of facts, filed Feb 21, 2006
State's motion for summary judgement
- to dismiss the plaintiff's
claims outright
State's
motion, filed Jan 24, 2006
State's
statement of facts, filed Jan 24, 2006
Ken Walo
affidavit, filed Jan 24, 2006
Ken
Walo exhibit, filed Jan 24, 2006 - memo which alters the
indemnification clause
Plaintiff's
response, filed Feb 21, 2006 (same as above)
Plaintiff's
opposition to State's statement of facts, filed Feb 21, 2006
Dismissal - Judge Singal
ruled in favor of the union's motion for summary judgement and
dismissed plaintiff's complaint March 31, 2006. Read the full order.
Appeal - we filed a notice of appeal on April 25, 2006.
Appeal decision - upholding the District Court's decision.
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed November 6, 2007
Brief in opposition (the union's reply) filed January 9, 2008
Petitioner's reply filed January 29, 2008