McMurray v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
GIBSON, District Judge.
The defendants have moved to dismiss the amended bill of complaint, basing their motion upon the contention that it does not set forth a case within the equitable powers of the court.
The bill is quite long and somewhat confusing. It-sets forth one side of a controversy between two subordinate lodges of the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, which was heard before all the tribunals of the brotherhood, with varying results, but with plaintiffs’ lodge finally losing before the brotherhood’s board of appeals. The dispute was, and is, in respect to seniority rights upon a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- California v. Southern Pacific Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Equitable Trust Co. v. Western Pac. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1916
3Cited by4 opinions
- Shaup v. Grand International Brotherhood of Locomotive EngineersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931
- Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. PriceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
- Bell v. Western Ry.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1934
- Madera v. Monongahela Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947