Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
LEVENTHAL, Circuit Judge:
This appeal involves still another phase of the railroad work rules dispute that erupted again in 1959 when the nation’s major carriers served notices under Section 6 of the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S. C. § 156 (1964), to abrogate existing rules regulating the use of conductors and trainmen, or “crew consist,” on yard and road crews. We have recently recounted the events that followed this opening round. 1 It suffices here to say that in 1960 the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen (BRT) served counter notices insisting that not less than one conductor and two trainmen be…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Akron & Barberton Belt RailroadCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
- Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Company, Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company (Lines East)Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
3Cited by47 opinions
- Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. United Transportation UnionSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- The Delaware and Hudson Railway Company v. United Transportation UnionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1971
- Oliver L. North v. Lawrence E. Walsh, in His Official Capacities as "Independent Counsel" and "Independent Counsel: Iran/contra,"Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1989
- Washington Medical Center, Inc. v. HolleDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- Manning v. City of AuburnCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1992
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.