Justia U.S. D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

Plaintiff, acting pro se, sued defendant for alleged violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. 621, and the District of Columbia Human Rights Act when defendant declined to hire her. At issue was whether the district court properly dismissed the complaint where plaintiff failed to appear from a single motions hearing when she believed that motions she had previously filed for a change of venue and for the magistrate judge's recusal remained pending and operated to suspend all proceedings. The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint where the district court's dismissal was inconsistent with precedent when it had not previously found plaintiff disobedient or dilatory, did not attempt lesser sanctions, and failed to explain why the case-ending sanctions of dismissal was necessary.

Plaintiffs petitioned for review of a National Labor Relations Board ("Board") finding where a union employee, with a traveler permit from plaintiffs, reported to his employer that a piece of machinery was not properly deployed. At issue was whether a union violated section 8(b)(1)(A)of the National Labor Relations Act ("Act") if a union disciplined a union member who complied with an employer's safety rules. The court granted the petition for review and held that it could not find any support in sections 7 and 8(b)(1)(A) of the Act for the Board's decision where the board rejected the administrative law judge's effort to find a concerted activity out of the facts of the case, where the Board relied on its broad per se policy, and where it would be improper to remand to the Board to consider an alternative ground that it had explicitly declined to do.