DURST v. OREGON EDUCATION ASSOCIATION (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.2021-07-29No. No. 20-35374

Summary · law.co

Holding. The district court's summary judgment is affirmed. The plaintiffs' claims for prospective relief are moot, their First Amendment claims against unions fail because private dues agreements lack state action, and their claims against school districts fail because they affirmatively consented to the deductions.

Three individuals challenged union membership dues deductions under the First Amendment, claiming their rights were violated. The district court dismissed their claims on summary judgment, and the appellate court affirmed that decision on multiple independent grounds.

The court found that claims seeking to stop future dues deductions were moot because the plaintiffs had resigned their union membership with no indication they would rejoin. As to the remaining claims against the unions themselves, the court held that private membership agreements do not involve state action and therefore do not trigger constitutional protections. For claims against school districts, the court reasoned that because the plaintiffs had voluntarily agreed to the dues deductions, the Supreme Court's decision in Janus—which addressed mandatory public-sector union fees—did not protect them from honoring their own agreements.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Mootness of claims for prospective injunctive relief after union resignation
Whether private union membership agreements implicate state action and constitutional scrutiny
Application of Janus decision to voluntarily agreed-upon dues deductions
First Amendment rights regarding union membership dues

Procedural posture

Appellants appealed from the district court's grant of summary judgment in their § 1983 First Amendment action challenging union membership dues deductions.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

MEMORANDUM **

Jeremy Durst, Deanne Tanner, and Michael Garcie appeal from the district courts summary judgment in their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging First Amendment claims arising out of union membership dues. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. JL Beverage Co., LLC v. Jim Beam Brands Co., 828 F.3d 1098, 1104 (9th Cir. 2016) (decision on cross-motions for summary judgment); Foster v. Carson, 347 F.3d 742, 745 (9th Cir. 2003) (mootness determinations). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Enlow v. Salem-Keizer Yellow Cab Co., 389 F.3d 802, 811 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on plaintiffs’ claims for prospective relief because such claims are moot. See Bain v. Cal. Teachers Assn, 891 F.3d 1206, 1211-15 (9th Cir. 2018) (finding plaintiffs’ claims for prospective relief moot when they resigned their union membership and presented no reasonable likelihood that they would rejoin the union in the future).

Summary judgment was proper on plaintiffs’ First Amendment claims against Oregon Education Association, Southern Oregon Bargaining Council Eagle Point Education Certified and Classified Employees, and Portland Association of Teachers because the deduction of union membership dues arose from private membership agreements between the parties, and “private dues agreements do not trigger state action and independent constitutional scrutiny.” Belgau, v. Inslee, 975 F.3d 940, 946-49 (9th Cir. 2020), cert. denied, No. 20-1120, ––– U.S. ––––, ––– S.Ct. ––––, ––– L.Ed.2d ––––, 2021 WL 2519114 (June 21, 2021) (discussing state action).

Summary judgment was proper on plaintiffs’ First Amendment claim against Eagle Point School District 9 and Portland Public Schools/Multnomah County School District Number 1 because plaintiffs affirmatively consented to the voluntary deduction of union dues, and the Supreme Courts decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, Council 31, ––– U.S. ––––, 138 S. Ct. 2448, 201 L.Ed.2d 924 (2018), did not extend a First Amendment right to avoid paying union dues that were agreed upon under validly entered membership agreements. See Belgau, 975 F.3d at 950-52.

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.