Legal Opinion

American Brake Shoe & Foundry Co. v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided January 10, 1935PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MACK, Circuit Judge.

Consequent upon the Interborough receiver’s application 52 for permission to dis-affirm the Manhattan lease, two important issues have been raised in these proceedings: First, applications have been made by the city and separately by^ the transit commission as the city’s agent, for leave to sue the Interborough, its receiver, and others in the state court for a declaratory judgment that the cessation of operation of through trains over elevated and subway routes, such cessation being the threatened' result of disaffirmance, would be a breach of Interborough’s obligations…

2Cases cited57 opinions

  1. Pierce v. Society of SistersSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  2. Kline v. Burke Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
  3. Langnes v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  4. McClellan v. CarlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  5. Prentis v. Atlantic Coast Line Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. National Licorice Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. Diners Club, Inc. v. A. J. Bumb, Trustee of Dashew Business MacHines Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
  3. In Re Chicago Rapid Transit Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1942
  4. Special Jet Services, Inc. v. Federal InsuranceDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1979
  5. Warner v. Conn (Kopp)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943

16 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