South Prairie Construction Co. v. Local No. 627, International Union of Operating Engineers Case Brief
Audio lesson available for this case
LSD+ subscribers can listen to a recorded discussion of this brief - the full facts, holding, and reasoning in audio form.
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: The Supreme Court held that a Court of Appeals, after reversing the NLRB’s finding on “single employer” status, erred by deciding the “appropriate bargaining unit” issue itself instead of remanding to the Board for its initial determination.
Legal Significance: This case underscores the principle of agency deference: courts must remand to an agency for determination of issues within its primary statutory jurisdiction, rather than deciding them de novo, even after correcting an agency error.
South Prairie Construction Co. v. Local No. 627, International Union of Operating Engineers Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
A union filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) alleging that South Prairie Construction Co. (South Prairie) and Peter Kiewit Sons’ Co. (Kiewit), both subsidiaries of PKS, constituted a single employer under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and that South Prairie was thus bound by Kiewit’s collective bargaining agreement. The NLRB found they were separate employers and dismissed the complaint (p. b871-4). The Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit reversed, finding South Prairie and Kiewit were a single employer (p. b872-6). Crucially, the Court of Appeals then proceeded to decide a second issue not definitively passed upon by the Board: that the employees of both companies constituted an appropriate bargaining unit under § 9 of the NLRA (p. b873-4). It then found an unfair labor practice and remanded to the Board for issuance of an order. The companies and the NLRB petitioned for certiorari, primarily arguing the Court of Appeals improperly decided the bargaining unit question.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Did the Court of Appeals err by deciding the appropriate bargaining unit under § 9 of the National Labor Relations Act in the first instance, after reversing the National Labor Relations Board’s determination on the separate issue of whether two companies constituted a single employer?
Yes. The Court of Appeals invaded the statutory province of the NLRB Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla par
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Did the Court of Appeals err by deciding the appropriate bargaining unit under § 9 of the National Labor Relations Act in the first instance, after reversing the National Labor Relations Board’s determination on the separate issue of whether two companies constituted a single employer?
Conclusion
This case reinforces the doctrine of primary jurisdiction and the limited scope Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad min
Legal Rule
The selection of an appropriate bargaining unit under § 9(b) of the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit
Legal Analysis
The Supreme Court reasoned that the determination of an appropriate bargaining unit Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum d
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Appellate court erred by deciding appropriate bargaining unit after reversing NLRB