Rauhoff v. Henry Gramling & Co.
District Court, E.D. Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
TRIMBLE, District Judge.
For the purposes of jurisdiction the amendment to the complaint filed on June 9, 1941, may well be considered to state the jurisdictional allegations on which plaintiff and interveners reply in this cause, as follows: “The plaintiff, Talmadge Rauhoff, was employed by the defendant corporation on the 24th day of July, 1939; that his duties consisted of unloading flour, feed and other commodities from box cars on the track in Russell-ville, Arkansas, directly to trucks owned and operated by this defendant, and such goods were delivered without stop to the retailers of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- A. L. A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Stafford v. WallaceSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Binderup v. Pathe Exchange, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- National Labor Relations Board v. FainblattSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Jewel Tea Co. v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1941
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Walling v. Goldblatt Bros.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1942
- Walling v. Consumers Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1945
- Schroepfer v. A. S. Abell Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1943
- Walling v. Mutual Wholesale Food & Supply Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1942
- Federal Express Corp. v. WoodsTennessee Supreme Court · 1978
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.