Question: Caruso was sole proprietor of Linoleum & Carpet City in Spokane, Washington. He also owned a parking lot a quarter of a mile from his business. Periodically, delivery trucks blocked access to the lot. On October 26, Caruso found a beer truck and a van blocking the entrance to his lot. Caruso called a tow truck to have the vehicles removed. (He had first called the owner, whose name was on the truck, and asked him to remove it.) The driver of the van settled his share of the tow truck costs, but Contos, the driver of the truck, refused to pay his share. Contos told Caruso he would report him to the Teamsters Union and the union would "break" him. On November 9, an article was published in the Washington Teamster.
The article, titled "Don't Patronize Carpet City in Spokane," was printed once on the front page of the teamster paper and twice more in substantially the same form on page 5. It continued to state that the owner harassed laboring people who used his parking lot. It was signed Teamsters Union, Local 690. Soon after publication of the first three articles, people began calling Linoleum & Carpet City and stating that they would not shop there. Sales dropped dramatically, and the following May, Caruso relocated his business hoping to minimize his losses. Assess the union's activities in light of the NLRA. Are there any unfair labor practices? Are there any common law counts that Caruso could pursue against the union for destroying his business? If so, does he face a preemption problem? See Caruso v. Teamsters Local 690 [120 L.R.R.M. 2233 (Wash. S.C. 1983)].