National Football League Players Ass'n v. National Football League
874 F.3d 222
5th Cir.2017Background
- Ezekiel Elliott (NFL player) faced a six-game suspension imposed by Commissioner Roger Goodell after an NFL investigation into alleged domestic violence; Elliott invoked the CBA arbitration procedure.
- Arbitration hearing before Harold Henderson occurred Aug 29–31, 2017; the arbitrator indicated a decision was forthcoming but had not yet issued one when the NFLPA sued on Elliott’s behalf Aug 31, 2017 seeking a preliminary injunction to block the suspension.
- The arbitrator issued an award upholding the suspension on Sept 5, 2017; the district court nevertheless issued a preliminary injunction on Sept 8, 2017 enjoining enforcement of the suspension.
- The NFL appealed and sought a stay; the Fifth Circuit considered whether the district court had subject-matter jurisdiction under § 301 of the LMRA (29 U.S.C. § 185) when the complaint was filed prior to a final arbitral award.
- The Fifth Circuit majority held the suit was premature because Elliott had not exhausted contractual grievance/arbitration remedies at the time he filed suit and none of the recognized exceptions to exhaustion applied.
- The court VACATED the district court’s preliminary injunction and REMANDED with instructions to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; a dissent argued the district court did have jurisdiction because the CBA process was repudiated and arbitration was fundamentally unfair.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether federal court had § 301 LMRA jurisdiction when suit filed before final arbitration award | NFLPA: Alleged breach of CBA satisfies § 301 and jurisdiction; exhaustion is not jurisdictional post-Arbaugh | NFL: Filing was premature; exhaustion of contractual remedies is jurisdictional and required before suit | Held: No jurisdiction at filing because remedies not exhausted; dismissal required |
| Whether exhaustion is jurisdictional or a claims-processing rule | NFLPA: Post-Arbaugh exhaustion is non-jurisdictional (prudential) | NFL: Supreme Court and circuit precedent treat CBA exhaustion as jurisdictional prerequisite | Held: Exhaustion remains jurisdictional in this context; Meredith and Supreme Court precedent control |
| Whether any exception excuses failure to exhaust (repudiation, DFR, futility) | NFLPA: Repudiation/fundamental unfairness of arbitration process excused exhaustion here | NFL: No repudiation—NFL participated in arbitration; adverse rulings ≠ repudiation | Held: Exceptions do not apply; repudiation not established; exhaustion required |
| Whether later issuance of arbitral award cures initial lack of jurisdiction | NFLPA: Subsequent award should allow district court action | NFL: Timely jurisdictional defect at filing is fatal even if award issues later | Held: Jurisdiction assessed at time of filing; later award does not cure premature filing |
Key Cases Cited
- Republic Steel Corp. v. Maddox, 379 U.S. 650 (1965) (federal labor policy favors use of contractual grievance procedures as mode of redress)
- Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 171 (1967) (judicial review ordinarily unavailable absent exhaustion of grievance/arbitration procedures; limited exceptions exist)
- United Paperworkers Int’l Union v. Misco, Inc., 484 U.S. 29 (1987) (courts must generally order resort to private grievance/arbitration mechanisms when contract so provides)
- Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500 (2006) (distinguishes jurisdictional rules from nonjurisdictional claim-processing requirements)
- Henderson ex rel. Henderson v. Shinseki, 562 U.S. 428 (2011) (clarifies when procedural rules are jurisdictional; courts must be cautious labeling rules jurisdictional)
- Meredith v. La. Fed’n of Teachers, 209 F.3d 398 (5th Cir. 2000) (Fifth Circuit holding that courts lack subject-matter jurisdiction over CBA breach claims unless contractual procedures exhausted)
- Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134 (2012) (a rule labeled nonjurisdictional may still be mandatory and timely enforced)
- Ramirez-Lebron v. Int’l Shipping Agency, Inc., 593 F.3d 124 (1st Cir. 2010) (arbitral integrity/repudiation can excuse exhaustion where employer’s conduct effectively excludes or subverts arbitration)