Nursing home takes fight for a jury trial to federal appeals court
The Seventh Amendment protects a common-sense right: When the government accuses you of wrongdoing and comes after your money or your livelihood, the people deciding your guilt or innocence should not be the same people who accused you in the first place. That separation keeps government power in check. Without it, an agency can act as accuser, judge, and jury all at once, with no independent check on whether it got the facts or the law right.
For decades, Congress handed more and more civil enforcement power to federal agencies, and those agencies built in-house courts to hear the cases they themselves brought. Proponents argued these tribunals were more efficient than federal court, letting agencies apply specialized “expertise.” But that efficiency came with a price: defendants’ getting their day in court—the right the Seventh Amendment was specifically designed to protect.
A labor dispute over a meeting space
PLF client Rosewood Care is a New York-based nursing home. Rosewood’s employees are represented by a union, and the two had a strong relationship for many years. When union representatives visited Rosewood’s nursing home facility, they provided advance notice and were provided with meeting space. The union “set up” to meet employees in Rosewood’s chapel, dining room, employee breakroom, or human resources office, areas that would not disrupt day-to-day operations.
After a 2018 renovation removed the chapel and dining room, Rosewood asked the union to use the breakroom instead, keeping other areas clear for residents and their families. The union agreed. During the COVID-19 pandemic, when state regulations prevented union members from entering the facility, union representatives met with employees in the parking lot. But when those restrictions were lifted, Rosewood again asked the union to “set up” in the breakroom.
The union initially agreed. But a new union representative decided otherwise, insisted on using the parking lot, and became confrontational whenever she was asked to use the breakroom. Rosewood was even forced to call the police to protect its residents’ peace and quiet. This pattern went on for months.
While all this was happening, Rosewood had to deal with another issue. One of its employees broke his foot playing sports outside of work. Even though he failed to properly apply for leave, Rosewood enrolled him as a courtesy. But that courtesy period had a deadline, and the agreement between Rosewood and the union required the employee to seek an extension in writing. Because he failed to do so—and because he had failed to show up for work over a significant period of time—Rosewood ended his employment.
The union eventually filed unfair labor practice charges, arguing Rosewood had illegally restricted its access and unlawfully fired the employee who failed to submit extension paperwork. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) then decided to prosecute Rosewood, and the case went before an NLRB administrative law judge (ALJ)—not a court, and not a jury.
A verdict with no jury
The ALJ found Rosewood liable and ordered the facility to, among other things, reinstate the fired employee with backpay, plus pay him additional money for all other injuries supposedly resulting from his firing. Rosewood’s only recourse was to ask the NLRB itself to review the ruling. When it did, it unsurprisingly sided with its own ALJ. At no point did an independent judge or jury hear the case.
In the 2024 Supreme Court case SEC v. Jarkesy, the Court ruled that the Seventh Amendment requires a jury trial when the government seeks money penalties for claims that would have been heard by juries in 1791, when the Seventh Amendment was adopted. The NLRB’s claims here would have been heard in a common law court by a jury in 1791; therefore, the NLRB’s administrative proceeding violates Rosewood’s Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial.
Rosewood filed a Petition for Review with the United States Court of Appeals. In its opening brief, filed August 21, Rosewood asks the court to vacate the NLRB’s decision and rule that the NLRB’s administrative proceeding unconstitutionally deprived Rosewood of its right to a jury trial. A win would test how far the Seventh Amendment’s protections reach into the labor disputes the NLRB decides in-house.
