Advertisement

May 21, 2013

Employer Groups Fail in Attempt to Stay Quickie-Election Rules

On Saturday, April 28, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace’s (“Plaintiffs”) attempt to stay the implementation of the quickie-election rules that go into effect May 1st  was denied by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia's Judge James E. Boasberg. In his brief minute order,

Judge Boasberg denied the plaintiff's Motion to Stay, filed on Friday, April 27, stating that “[a]ny injury to Plaintiffs is not irreparable because the Court will issue its Memorandum Opinion on the merits by May 15, which date will precede any potential election under the new rule.”

© 2013 BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

About the Author

Associate

Steve L. Hernández is an associate in the Los Angeles office of Barnes & Thornburg. A member of the firm’s Labor and Employment Law Department, Mr. Hernández focuses his practice on traditional labor and employment law. Mr. Hernández has extensive experience litigating class action matters.

Mr. Hernández also brings four years of experience as an attorney with Region 21 of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to his practice. While at the NLRB, Mr. Hernández investigated unfair labor practice, litigated unfair labor practice...

310-284-3775

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under ce