Legal Opinion
In re the Arbitration between Consolidated Rail Corp. & National Railroad Passenger
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided April 6, 1987No. Civ. A. No. 87-0510PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
GASCH, Senior District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
The issue which today confronts the Court is narrow: whether a contract be*406tween two parties to arbitrate their differences requires the Court to compel arbitration where the issue to be submitted demands a ruling grounded on public policy considerations.
On January 4, 1987, a train controlled by the Consolidated Rail Corporation (“Conrail”), petitioner, failed to heed a series of slow and stop signals and consequently entered the path of a high speed passenger train operated by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”),…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. ByrdSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- W. R. Grace & Co. v. Local Union 759, International Union of the United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum & Plastic WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. Consolidated Rail CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1990
- Consol. R. Corp. v. Nat. Rr Passenger Corp.District Court, District of Columbia · 1987