Palladino v. CNY Centro, Inc.

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals held that the rule from Martin v. Curran applies to a union member’s state-court claim against an unincorporated labor union for breach of the duty of fair representation. Under that rule, the plaintiff must allege and prove authorization or ratification of the challenged conduct by every member of the union. The Court declined to overrule Martin, concluding that changes to the rule are better left to the Legislature.

Holdings

1. Martin v. Curran applies. A plaintiff suing a labor union as a voluntary unincorporated association must plead and prove that every member of the association authorized or ratified the alleged wrongful conduct.
2. Madden v. Atkins does not apply because its narrow exception concerns wrongful expulsion effected through a vote by the membership, whereas Palladino's grievances were withdrawn by the Union's executive board without a membership vote.
3. The Court declined to overrule Martin v. Curran, concluding that the rule involves both common-law principles and statutory interpretation and that any comprehensive change is better left to the Legislature.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Martin v. Curran's requirement that a plaintiff plead and prove authorization or ratification by every member of an unincorporated association applies to a union member's state-law action against the union for breach of the duty of fair representation.
2. Whether Madden v. Atkins's exception to the Martin rule for wrongful-expulsion actions applies when a union executive board, rather than the membership, decides not to submit a grievance to arbitration.
3. Whether the Court of Appeals should overrule Martin v. Curran.

Disposition

affirmed