Legal Opinion

Moorehead v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided December 6, 1948No. 48638; No. 48566; No. 48567; No. 48637PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court 1

The facts sufficiently appear from the opinion of the court.

2Opinion of the Court · MaddenMadden, Judge

Two of the four suits here involved, Nos. 48638 and 48637 are joint actions, brought pursuant to Rule 9 (a) of this court, which permits joint actions to be brought on behalf of claimants whose claims arise “out of the same transactions, occurrences or series of transactions or occurrences * * * if any question of law or fact common to all of them will arise in the action.” All of the claimants in all four suits were employees of The Alaska Railroad, an agency of the United States. They all claim to have worked more than 40 hours per…

3Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Finn v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  2. De Arnaud v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  3. United States v. TownsleySupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  4. Hearne v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1946
  5. Gray v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1948

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

4Cited by6 opinions

  1. BrownUnited States Court of Claims · 1978
  2. Keeney v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1960
  3. NeugentUnited States Court of Claims · 1970
  4. Arribas v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1953
  5. Giessler v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1951

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

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

Powered by the Exa API