Wilson v. Illinois Central Railroad
District Court, N.D. Illinois
1Opinion of the Court
JULIUS J. HOFFMAN, District Judge.
The motion of System Federation No. 99 of the Railway Employes’ Department, AFL-CIO, to intervene as a party defendant in this action is denied. The Federation is not entitled to intervene as a matter of right under Rule 24(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., inasmuch as intervention of right exists only where an intervenor stands to gain or lose by direct legal operation of the judgment. Pure Oil Co. v. Ross, 7 Cir., 1948, 170 F.2d 651. The Federation will not be affected by any judgment which might be rendered in the instant proceeding.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Fishgold v. Sullivan Drydock & Repair Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Crosby Steam Gage & Valve Co. v. Manning, Maxwell & Moore, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1943
- Pure Oil Co. v. RossCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1948
- Conner v. Pennsylvania R.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1949
- United States ex rel. Deavers v. Missouri, K. & T. R.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1949
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Harry J. Stadin v. Union Electric CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1962
- General Motors Corp. v. BurnsDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 1970
- Zdanok v. GLIDDEN COMPANY, DURKEE FAMOUS FOODS DIV.District Court, S.D. New York · 1960
- The Union Central Life Insurance Company v. Hamilton Steel Products Inc. v. United Steel Workers of America, Afl-CioCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1967
- Evancho v. United States Steel Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1962
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.