Benton v. Southern Pac. Co.

GOODMAN, District Judge.

When filed, the complaint in this action set out two causes of action. In the second cause of action, plaintiffs sought a declaration that the so-called majority union1 did not have the exclusive right to represent employees of defendant railroad in investigations held pursuant to Rule 332 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the majority union and defendant Southern Pacific Company. The Court heretofore dismissed the second cause of action upon the ground that it did not present a justiciable controversy.3 General Committee v. Southern Pacific Co., 320 U.S.…