Legal Opinion

Piercy v. Louisville & Nashville Railway Co.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided March 23, 1923PublishedCited by 55 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion op the Court by

Turner, Commissioner—

Affirming.

This appeal involves the seniority rights of a conductor on the Louisville & Nashville Eailroad.

*479Appellee Stanfill was for many years prior to 1922 an employe of that company, and for fifteen years or more had operated as passenger conductor a fast daylight train running between Cincinnati, Ohio, and Knoxville, Tennessee, known as number 32-33.

The company operated between those points three regular passenger trains each way each day; the through fast daylight train (number 32-33) one each way, a local daylight train running each way (number…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hudson v. Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific RailwayCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1913
  2. Pennsylvania Co. v. Reager's AdministratorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1913

3Cited by55 opinions

  1. Yazoo M.V.R. Co. v. SideboardMississippi Supreme Court · 1931
  2. National Labor Relations Board v. Union Pacific Stages, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1938
  3. Gatliff Coal Co. v. CoxCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1944
  4. Rentschler v. Missouri Pacific RailroadNebraska Supreme Court · 1934
  5. System Federation No. 59 of Railway Employees Department of American Federation of Labor v. Louisiana & A. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1941

50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API