Legal Opinion
O'Connell v. Erie Lackawanna Railroad
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided April 27, 1967No. 67 Civ. 1264PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HERLANDS, District Judge:
The instant motion for a preliminary injunction, brought on by an order to show cause, raises important questions as to the proper interpretation of the 1951 amendments to the Railway Labor Act. Plaintiffs are three yard service employees of the defendant Erie Lackawanna Railroad Company [hereinafter referred to as the Erie], who sue individually and on behalf of all members of the Switchmen’s Union of North America, AFL-CIO, [hereinafter referred to as the Switchmen’s Union] employed by the defendant railroad. The Switchmen’s Union is also a party plaintiff.…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- United States v. American Trucking AssociationsSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- National Woodwork Manufacturers Ass'n v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Cabell v. MarkhamCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
- Markham v. CabellSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Slocum v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Brotherhood of Railroad TrainmenDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1969
- W. L. Birkholz v. Elmer L. Dirks, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1968
- Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers v. New Jersey Transit Rail Operations, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1985
- O'connell v. Erie Lackawanna Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1968
- O'Connell v. Erie Lackawanna RailroadCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1968