As Corrected September 18, 2014.
APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT. The Honorable Gary L. Miller, Judge. Cause No. 49G21-1309-PO-34869.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: KIMBERLY A. JACKSON, Indianapolis, Indiana.
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: BRIAN J. PAUL, EMMANUEL V.R. BOULUKOS, Ice Miller LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana.
CRONE, Judge. BAKER, J., and BARNES, J., concur.
C.E.G. employed A.H. and G.S. C.E.G. petitioned for an injunction against A.H. on behalf of G.S. pursuant to the Workplace Violence Restraining Orders Act (" WVROA" ), which the trial court granted. A.H. appeals, arguing that because this case involves or grows out of a labor dispute, it is governed by the Anti-Injunction Act (" AIA" ), and therefore the trial court was without jurisdiction to issue the injunction pursuant to the WVROA. We agree. Therefore, we reverse and remand with instructions to dismiss C.E.G.'s petition without prejudice.
Facts and Procedural History
In September 2013, A.H. was an employee of C.E.G. A.H.'s supervisor was G.S. On Friday, September 6, 2013, A.H. was injured at work. Later that day, G.S. tried to call A.H. A.H. called G.S. back, and G.S. explained that he had called to see if A.H. wanted to work that Saturday. A.H. said, " I'm not coming in at no four in the morning. Now, I'll come in at six o' clock and work on something else, but I'm not coming in at no four in the morning because I'm not going to change my schedule for no one person." Tr. at 37. G.S. thought that A.H. was loud and disrespectful. G.S. was in a drive-thru, and the cashier could hear A.H. yelling. G.S. informed A.H. that he had found someone else to work, and they ended the call. Later, A.H. called G.S. and said, " If I was being disrespectful, I apologize. You just don't know the whole story. They are doing this for one person and I'm not going to bow down to just one person." Id. at 38.
The following Monday, G.S. called A.H. into his office to discuss their Friday phone conversation. G.S. told A.H. that he was disrespectful. A.H. responded, " Disrespect? You call that disrespectful after all they done to us?" Id. G.S. told A.H. that he was going to document his behavior, but G.S. did not take any disciplinary action.
Later that day, A.H. called G.S. to tell him that he wanted to get a second opinion on the workplace injury he had incurred on Friday. G.S. said that was fine but told A.H. to go to C.E.G.'s clinic to ensure that A.H. would be covered by C.E.G.'s insurance.
On Tuesday morning, A.H. called G.S. and told him that he would not be working because he was going to see his personal doctor for a second opinion on his workplace injury. Later that day, A.H. called C.E.G.'s employee assistance program (" EAP" ) and spoke to a therapist (" the Therapist" ). Afterward, the Therapist called C.E.G.'s director of human resources (" the Director" ) to report that A.H. was talking about blowing G.S.'s head off, that A.H. had hung up on her, and that
she was concerned about what he might do next. Id. at 29, 31. Also that day, G.S. was informed that an EAP therapist had reported that A.H. was talking about blowing his head off. Id. at 42.
On September 12, 2013, the Director sent a letter [" the Letter" ] to A.H. warning him to stay away from C.E.G. property " [i]n light of the threatening statements you made to [the Therapist] regarding blowing [G.S.'s] head off and obtaining a firearm." Id. at 25; Pet. Ex. 3. At some point, the Director tried to phone A.H. to confirm that he had received the Letter. A.H. returned his call and left a voicemail ...