Legal Opinion

David v. Boston & M. R. R.

District Court, D. New Hampshire

Decided March 7, 1947No. 557PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CONNOR, District Judge.

This is an action brought by the petitioner under the reemployment provisions of Section 8 of the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, as amended, Title 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 308, as extended by the Service Extension Act of 1941, Title 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, §§ 351-357.

The petitioner seeks reemployment with the defendant and judgment against it for loss of wages from the date of the alleged refusal to restore him to the position he held upon induction or to a position of like seniority, status, and pay.

The relevant provisions of the Act are as follows:

“8(b) In the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Fishgold v. Sullivan Drydock & Repair Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Kay v. General Cable CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1944
  3. United States v. BrandenburgCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1944
  4. Lord Mfg. Co. v. NemenzDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1946
  5. Droste v. Nash-Kelvinator CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1946

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lesher v. P. R. Mallory & Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1948
  2. Hudspeth v. Standard Oil Co.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1947
  3. White v. Boston & M. R. R.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API