Legal Opinion

Sularz v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railroad

District Court, D. Minnesota

Decided November 30, 1956No. Civ. No. 4961PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NORDBYE, Chief Judge.

■ The above cause came before the Court for trial without a jury.

This action is brought under Section 8 of the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, as amended.1 Plaintiff seeks to require the defendant to place him on the carmen mechanics’ seniority roster for its repair track as of the date on which he contends he would have been advanced or promoted from carman helper, the position he left to enter the military service, to a temporary carman mechanic if he had not been absent as a member of his country’s armed forces.

Plaintiff originally commenced this action…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Fishgold v. Sullivan Drydock & Repair Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Aeronautical Industrial District Lodge 727 v. CampbellSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  3. Diehl v. Lehigh Valley RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1955
  4. Diehl v. Lehigh Valley R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1954
  5. Spearmon v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1948

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Alfarone v. Fairchild Stratos Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1963
  2. Sularz v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railroad Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1958
  3. Donald I. Tilton v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, Wilfred L. Beck, Jr. v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, Guy H. McClearn Jr. v. Missouri Pacific Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1962
  4. Sularz v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie RailroadCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1958
  5. Tilton v. Missouri Pacific RailroadCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API