Pimentel v. Aloise

• Decision Date: 16 November 2018
• Docket Number: Case No. 18-cv-00411-EMC
• Parties: ROLANDO PIMENTEL, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ROME ALOISE, et al., Defendants. ROLANDO PIMENTEL, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ROBERT BONSALL, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of California

ROLANDO PIMENTEL, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ROME ALOISE, et al., Defendants.

ROLANDO PIMENTEL, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ROBERT BONSALL, et al., Defendants.

Case No. 18-cv-00411-EMC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

November 16, 2018

RELATED TO

Case No. 18-cv-01958-EMC

ORDER (1) GRANTING ALOISE DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS; (2) GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND; (3) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART ALOISE DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED CLAIMS; AND (4) GRANTING BONSALL DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS

Docket Nos. 31, 38, 44 in C-18-0411 EMC

Docket No. 16 in C-18-1958 EMC

Plaintiffs are two individuals, Rolando Pimentel and Zacharias Salas, who, during the relevant period of events, were members of a local union, the Teamsters Local Union No. 601 ("Local 601"). They have filed two actions that have been related before this Court. Both actions relate to the 2013 election for officers for Local 601. Plaintiffs were part of a slate of candidates (the Pimentel Slate) that challenged the incumbent principal officer's slate (the Alvarado Slate). Plaintiffs lost.

In the first lawsuit, No. C-18-0411 EMC, Plaintiffs sue the incumbent principal officer, Ashley Alvarado, and Local 601. They also sue Teamsters Joint Council No. 7 ("Joint Council") - a governing body above Local 601 but below the overarching organization, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters ("IBT") - and the Joint Council's President, Rome Aloise. In this action, Plaintiffs claim, for the most part, election-related misconduct on the part of Mr. Aloise (who endorsed Ms. Alvarado's candidacy) and Ms. Alvarado. Hereinafter, the defendants in the first lawsuit shall be referred to collectively as the Aloise Defendants.

In the second lawsuit, No. C-18-1958 EMC, Plaintiffs sue the law firm Beeson, Tayer, Bodine LLP and one of its shareholders, Robert Bonsall. The Beeson firm and Mr. Bonsall provide legal services to Local 601 and the Joint Council. According to Plaintiffs, the Beeson firm and Mr. Bonsall are closely aligned with Mr. Aloise, provided campaign assistance to Ms. Alvarado, and also engaged in election-related misconduct on behalf of Mr. Aloise and/or Ms. Alvarado. Hereinafter, the defendants in the second lawsuit shall be referred to collectively as the Bonsall Defendants.

Currently pending before the Court is a motion to dismiss in each case. In addition, Plaintiffs have moved for leave to amend to add new claims in the Aloise lawsuit. With respect to the motion to amend, the Aloise Defendants have opposed amendment but, in the alternative, have moved to dismiss the new claims (assuming amendment is permitted).

Having considered the parties' briefs and accompanying submissions, as well as the oral argument of counsel, the Court hereby GRANTS the Aloise Defendants' motion to dismiss (Docket No. 31 in the Aloise case). The Court further GRANTS Plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend (Docket No. 38 in the Aloise case), and, as to the amended claims, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the Aloise Defendants' motion to dismiss (Docket No. 44 in the Aloise case). Finally, the Court GRANTS the Bonsall Defendants' motion to dismiss (Docket No. 16 in the Bonsall case).

I. FACTUAL & PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In their complaints, Plaintiffs allege as follows.¹

The IBT is an organization that represents workers throughout the United States. Through its affiliated local unions, the IBT has approximately 1.4 million members in a wide range ofindustries. See Aloise Compl. ¶ 13.

The Joint Council is "an intermediate body" within the IBT. "[T]hrough its affiliated local unions[,] [the Joint Council] represents approximately 100,000 members who work in a variety of industries throughout Northern California, including members working in the cannery and food processing industry. Its main office is in San Francisco, California." Aloise Compl. ¶ 5. During the relevant period of events, Mr. Aloise was the President of the Joint Council. He was also the principal officer for an IBT local union, Teamsters Local Union No. 853 ("Local 853"). See Aloise Compl. ¶ 7.

Local 601 is an IBT local union affiliated with the Joint Council. See Aloise Compl. ¶ 6. During the relevant period of events, Ms. Alvarado was the principal officer of Local 601. See Aloise Compl. ¶ 8.

During the relevant period of events, Mr. Pimentel and Mr. Salas were members of Local 601. See Aloise Compl. ¶¶ 3-4. (Currently, Ms. Salas is still a union member but not Mr. Pimentel, who resigned his union membership in October 2016. See Docket No. 38 (Mot. at 1).)

The Beeson law firm provides legal services to both the Joint Council and Local 601. See Aloise Compl. ¶ 10. Mr. Bonsall is a senior shareholder at the Beeson firm. He has served as counsel for both the Joint Council and Local 601. See Aloise Compl. ¶ 11.

In December 2013, there was a regularly scheduled election for officers for Local 601. Ms. Alvarado, the incumbent principal officer for Local 601, headed one slate of candidates (the Alvarado Slate), which was strongly supported by Mr. Aloise. See Aloise Compl. ¶¶ 8, 11, 47. Plaintiffs were part of a different slate of candidates, known as the Pimentel Slate See Aloise Compl. ¶¶ 3-4, 49. The Alvarado Slate defeated the Pimentel Slate, see Aloise Compl. ¶ 31, as well as another competing slate known as the Reyes Slate. See Docket No. 38 (IRO Op. at 21) (noting that the head of this slate was Juanlucio Reyes).

Shortly after the election, "Plaintiffs submitted a post-election protest[,] pursuant to the short time requirements of the IBT Constitution[,] based upon the limited information they had acquired regarding election improprieties committed by [Ms.] ALVARADO and her supporters,including [Mr.] ALOISE."² Aloise Compl. ¶ 32. Under the IBT Constitution, the protest was to be heard by the Joint Council, which, as noted above, had Mr. Aloise as its President. See Aloise Compl. ¶ 33.

Mr. Aloise appointed a hearing panel to consider Plaintiffs' post-election protest. A hearing was held in February 2014. In June 2014, the Joint Council panel rejected Plaintiffs' protest and confirmed the election of Ms. Alvarado and her slate. The IBT subsequently confirmed the Joint Council's ruling. See Aloise Compl. ¶ 34.

After the IBT issued its decision, Mr. Pimentel submitted charges to the Independent Review Board ("IRB"), asserting election-related misconduct and other wrongdoing by both Mr. Aloise and Ms. Alvarado. See Aloise Compl. ¶ 35. The IRB is a three-member body that was established by a consent decree in 1989 after the IBT and officers were charged with violations of RICO. See Aloise Compl. ¶¶ 25-26. "The mandate of the IRB included the investigation of any allegations of . . . corruption, including bribery, embezzlement, extortion, loan sharking," and so forth. Aloise Compl. ¶ 27. After investigating, the IRB has the power "to issue a written report detailing its findings, charges and recommendations concerning the discipline of union officers, members, employees and representatives." Aloise Compl. ¶ 28. Any recommendations of discipline are submitted to the IBT, and the IBT is required to take whatever action is appropriate under the IBT Constitution. See Aloise Compl. ¶ 29. "If the IRB determines the IBT response is inadequate to remedy the defects found by the IRB it must convene a hearing on the matter before the Independent Review Officer ('IRO'). Following hearing, the IRO issues a final and bindingdetermination of the findings and remedy to be taken," and "[s]uch decision is judicially enforceable." Aloise Compl. ¶ 30.

The IRB initiated an investigation based on Mr. Pimentel's charges. Throughout the course of the IRB investigation, Plaintiffs were contacted. See Aloise Compl. ¶ 36. In February 2016,

the IRB issued a 122-page Report of its findings and recommendations concerning [Mr.] Aloise based on misconduct committed in his capacity as International Vice-President [of ITB], Joint Council 7 President[,] and principal officer of Teamsters Local 853, including unlawful conduct he engaged in involving the Local 601 election of officers. [¶] The IRB report also documented wrongdoing committed by [Ms.] ALVARADO related to the conduct of the 2013 election of [o]fficers of Local 601.[³]

Aloise Compl. ¶¶ 37-38. (A copy of parts of the IRB report can be found at Docket No. 49-1 (Absalom Reply Decl., Ex. H). The IRB report indicates that "[Mr.] Aloise engaged in a pervasive pattern of violative conduct in connection with the Local 601 election in 2013" - e.g., he "us[ed] union resources and equipment to support [Ms.] Alvarado and to undermine her opponents in the Local 601 election"; he "used Joint Council letterhead in an attempt to stop [Mr.] Pimentel form circulating, as was his right to do, photographs of [Ms.] Alvarado in the campaign with the threat of a retaliatory bogus charge"; etc. Docket No. 49-1 (Absalom Reply Decl., Ex. H) (IRB Report at 108, 116).)

Although the IBT was supposed to conduct a hearing based on the IRB report, it failed to do so. See Aloise Compl. ¶¶ 39-40. "After repeated delays, the IBT sent a letter to the IRB advising that it would not convene a hearing on the charges against [Mr.] ALOISE and purporting to refer the matter back to the IRB." Aloise Compl. ¶ 40.

Thereafter, the IRO became involved and held a hearing in May 2017. In October 2017, the IRO (former District Judge Barbara Jones) found Mr. Aloise guilty of the charges made by the IRB, including those related to his conduct involving the Local 601 election. (A copy of the IROopinion can be found at Docket No. 38. The IRO found, inter alia, that Mr. Aloise's "repeated use of Union resources in support of [Ms.] Alvarado's 2013 re-election campaign brought reproach upon the IBT." Docket No. 38 (IRO Op. at 52).) In December 2017, the IRO issued a supplemental decision under which Mr. Aloise was suspended and banned from all official positions he held within the Teamster...