 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hill v. Peterson11/27/2001
Defendants/appellees Timothy and Susan Peterson asked us to reconsider our May 22, 2001, opinion vacating the trial court's order dismissing plaintiff/appellant Donald Hill's tortious interfer ence with prospective advantage causes of action against them. Hill v. Peterson, 200 Ariz. 217, 25 P.3d 19 (App. 2001). T he Petersons contend we incorrectly found Hill's causes of action not preempted by the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S. C. A. ยงยง 141 thr ough 187 (the Act), ar guing that the jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) depends not on the parties' relationship, but rather, on their conduct and that our opinion, which r elied on Halstead Metal Products v. NLRB, 940 F .2d 66 (4th Cir. 1991), was inconsistent with other federal cases. Because we agree that the conduct alleged is dispositive of the preemption issue and presents a narr ower ground for resolving this case, see State v. Leyva, 184 Ar iz. 439, 909 P. 2d 506 (App. 1995), we grant the Petersons' motion. However, because the trial court can adjudicate Hill's tortious interfer ence with prospective advantage causes of action without determining whether Peterson committed an unfair labor practice under the Act, the ultimate result does not change. Accordingly, we withdraw our previous opinion and replace it with this one, vacating the trial court's dismissal of Hill's causes of action and remanding the matter for further proceedings consistent with this decision.
Facts and Procedural History
The following facts are essentially undisputed. Hill, an oncologist, was hired in 1994 by Thomas Davis Medical Centers, P. C. (TDMC), which was subsequently purchased by FPA Medical Management of Arizona, Inc. In ear ly 1997, Hill's physicians' union filed a claim with the NLRB on behalf of Hill and other physicians, accusing FPA and TDMC of unfair labor practices under the Act, a claim the NLRB found had merit. Hill resigned from TDMC in October 1997. In March 1998, he filed this action against FPA, its president and chief executive officer, Timothy Peterson, and his wife, Susan, claiming that, sometime after he resigned from TDMC, FPA and Peterson had interfer ed with his "business expectancy in being awarded [employment] contract with Intergroup . . . Pacific Care" and that FPA had interfer ed with his "business expectancy in his negotiations with Arizona Oncology Associates."
Claiming that FPA and Peterson had also threatened to enforce "a covenant not to compete contained in [Hill's employment] contract with TDMC," Hill additionally sought a declaration that the covenant was unenforceable because, with his depar ture, TDMC no longer had an "oncology department and, thus, no legitimate interest in depriving the public of services." Hill further claimed that FPA and TDMC had breached the agreement by constructively terminating his employment contract before he resigned and that FPA and TDMC had sought to selectively enforce the covenant against him because of "his union activities" while he had been employed at TDMC.
The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), Ariz. R. Civ. P. , 16 A.R. S., Pt. 1, contending the causes of action were preempted by the Act. They argued that, because Hill's allegations of constructive discharge and antiunion bias in his anticompetition claim had been raised on his behalf by his union in both the prior and a pending action before the NLRB, all his state causes of action were preempted. Although Hill offered to strike from his complaint the two bases for declaring the non-competition covenant unenforceable that described unfair labor pr actices under the Act, the trial court nev
Page 1 2 3 4 Arizona Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|