## Facts

- The NFLPA served as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative for NFL players and certified and regulated player agents (“contract advisors”) under written Regulations requiring arbitration of certification disputes.
- William Black, a certified contract advisor, and his company Professional Management, Inc., sought to continue his certification in 1998 by submitting a sworn application agreeing to be bound by the Regulations.
- Black’s application stated that challenges to denial, revocation, or suspension of certification must proceed exclusively through the Regulations’ arbitration procedure, and that the application, certification, and Regulations formed a contract with the NFLPA.
- The Regulations provided for arbitration before an arbitrator selected by the NFLPA.
- In May 1999, the NFLPA Disciplinary Committee issued a complaint against Black; in July 1999, it proposed revoking his certification for at least three years.
- Black sued in federal district court, asserting (among other theories) that the arbitrator-selection method violated the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) as inherently biased and that the NFLPA tortiously interfered with his business relations through the disciplinary process.
- Black sought emergency relief to halt arbitration (denied), and later sought leave to amend to add defamation and trade disparagement claims and to expand a race-discrimination claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981.
- The NFLPA moved for summary judgment, arguing the arbitration agreement was enforceable as written and that the tortious interference claim was preempted by LMRA § 301.

## Issues

1. Whether the FAA rendered unenforceable an arbitration procedure in which the NFLPA selects the arbitrator, despite Black’s written agreement to that procedure.
2. Whether LMRA § 301 preempted Black’s state-law tortious interference claim because adjudication would require interpreting the collective-bargaining agreement and/or the NFLPA agent Regulations.
3. Whether Black could proceed with discovery on a § 1981 race-discrimination claim and amend to add defamation and trade disparagement claims.

## Decision

- Granted summary judgment to the NFLPA on Black’s FAA-based challenge to the arbitration procedure.
- Granted summary judgment to the NFLPA on the tortious interference claim as preempted by LMRA § 301.
- Denied summary judgment without prejudice on the § 1981 claim and permitted Black to take discovery on that claim.
- Denied leave to amend to add defamation and trade disparagement claims.

## Legal Principles

- Arbitration agreements are generally enforced according to their terms under the FAA; courts do not rewrite agreed arbitrator-selection mechanisms absent a legally sufficient basis to invalidate the agreement or show actionable unfairness.
- A party’s prior, express contractual consent to arbitration procedures (including how the arbitrator is selected) weighs strongly against later claims that the agreed procedure is unenforceable.
- LMRA § 301 preempts state-law claims whose resolution is substantially dependent on interpreting a collective-bargaining agreement or closely related contractual rules governing labor-management relations.
- Federal civil-rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 are not displaced merely because related state-law business tort theories are preempted; they may proceed if the record does not warrant summary judgment.
- Leave to amend may be denied where proposed claims would be futile, duplicative, or otherwise legally insufficient in light of controlling doctrines (including federal labor-law preemption).

## Conclusion

The court enforced the agent arbitration agreement as written, held that a state-law tortious interference theory attacking union disciplinary action was preempted by LMRA § 301, and allowed limited discovery to proceed on a § 1981 discrimination claim while refusing to expand the case with defamation and trade disparagement amendments.


Black v. Nat'l Football League Players Ass'n, 87 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2000)