Legal Opinion
Thomas J. Finlin, Charles H. Hogentogler and Darrell L. Middleton v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided April 10, 1961No. 13393PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Per curiam
The appellants’ wage claims were denied by the National Railroad Adjustment Board. By their complaint they seek a trial de novo in the court below on the ground that the Board has not afforded them procedural due process. The court dismissed the action for lack of jurisdiction holding that the Board’s action was not reviewable and that the appellants were not entitled to a trial de novo and that the Board was a necessary party to the action. 1960, 187 F.Supp. 381.
The bases of the appellants’ claims are substantially similar to those asserted in Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Day, 1959, 360 U.S. 548,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Blackmar v. GuerreSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Union Pacific Railroad v. PriceSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. DaySupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Belford Barnett v. Pennsylvania-Reading Seashare LinesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1957
- Stranford v. Pennsylvania RailroadDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1957
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Brady v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1968
- Michael G. Radin v. United States of America and National Mediation BoardCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1983
- Union Equity Cooperative Exchange v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1973
- Fong v. American Airlines, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 1977
- Brady v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1969