NLRB Wins Injunction as Second Circuit Reverses 4-Sentence Order

A federal appeals court held that a parking management company must immediately hire unionized valet attendants and bargain with their union in an unusual decision that included thorough legal analysis that the court below improperly neglected.

The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed on Friday a federal judge’s ruling that had denied a National Labor Relations Board regional director’s request for an injunction against Parking Systems Plus Inc.

Judge Gary Brown, a Trump appointee to the Eastern District of New York, violated a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure with his four-sentence text order that failed to include support necessary for rejecting the injunction petition, the circuit court said. Brown also highlighted in his short denial that the agency sought the same relief in administrative proceedings, but that dual-track mechanism is exactly what Congress designed in the National Labor Relations Act, the court said.

The decision shows that the NLRB relies on federal judges who understand its authority to ask for immediate court orders and the legal test used to determine if its requests are warranted.

Section 10(j) of the NLRA empowers the agency to seek a temporary injunction, which can ensure that the NLRB’s eventual decision in the administrative case can fix the damage of any unfair labor practices despite the agency’s procedures moving so slowly.

The case arose from Parking Systems Plus refusing to hire unionized valet attendants who worked for the company that had the previous parking contract with a hospital in Stony Brook, N.Y.

NLRB Regional Director Teresa Poor issued a complaint against Parking Systems Plus for anti-union discrimination in April 2024, and filed a court petition for a 10(j) injunction five months later.

Brown rejected the injunction request in November 2024, saying Poor failed to articulate irreparable harm needed for an immediate order. He also said she sought the same relief before an administrative law judge, and that the timing of the filing suggested delay.

The Second Circuit said in Friday’s ruling that it normally vacates a faulty decision denying an injunction, but Brown’s failure to comply with a procedural rule meant it could review the merits of his improper ruling.

The appeals court held that an injunction is appropriate after it reviewed the entire record presented to Brown and to the administrative law judge that ruled against Parking Systems Plus in January.

The fact that Parking Systems Plus rehired some of its predecessor’s employees, but didn’t offer reinstatement to all of them supports the need for an injunction, the court said.

“Accordingly, we hold that a five-month delay alone does not preclude a finding of irreparable harm where a predecessor’s employees are ready and willing to return to their jobs under their bargained-for terms of employment,” wrote Judge Denny Chin, an Obama appointee.

Judges Guido Calabresi, a Clinton appointee, and Eunice Lee, a Biden appointee, joined the opinion.

The Second Circuit sent the case back to Brown to issue the requested injunction.

Parking Systems Plus’s lawyer, Jamie Felsen of Milman Labuda Law Group PLLC, didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment. An NLRB spokesperson declined to comment.

The case is Poor v. Parking Systems Plus, Inc., 2d Cir. App., No. 24-3324, 12/19/25.