Legal Opinion
Tee v. UAL Corp.
District Court, N.D. Georgia
Decided September 1, 1995No. 1:95-cr-00054PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
ORINDA D. EVANS, District Judge.
This action under Sections 2, Third and 2, Fourth of the Railway Labor Act (the “RLA”), 45 U.S.C. § 152 (Third), (Fourth), is before the court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. Because the court believes it can adequately decide this matter based on the pleadings and briefs of the parties, Plaintiffs’ motion for oral argument is denied.
The court treats the following assertions in Plaintiffs’ complaint as true: Plaintiffs and putative class members (collectively “Plaintiffs”) are United Airlines…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Virginian Railway Co. v. System Federation No. 40Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Venture Associates Corporation, a Tennessee Corporation v. Zenith Data Systems Corporation, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
- Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Jacksonville Terminal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Detroit & Toledo Shore Line Railroad v. United Transportation UnionSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Tee v. Ual Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1996