Legal Opinion

Pennsylvania R. R. System & Allied Lines Federation No. 90 v. Pennsylvania R.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided February 5, 1924No. 2875PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Sur Motion to Dismiss Bill under Rule 29 on Questions of Law Raised by Answer.'

Sur Motion to Dismiss on Bill, Answer, and Proofs.

Sur Trial Hearing on Bill, Answer, and Proofs.

DICKINSON, District Judge.

The above rather formidable array of subheadings is due to the three ways in which the defendants are pressing their defense to this bill. Rule 29 gives defendants the same right to present the questions of law raised by way of answer which could be raised by a motion to dismiss. The defendants have availed themselves of this right. When at the trial the plaintiffs rested their case, the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania Railroad v. United States Railroad Labor BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  2. Brotherhood of Railway & Steamship Clerks v. Pennsylvania R.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1922
  3. Fenstemacher v. Pennsylvania R.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1922

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania Railroad System & Allied Lines Federation No. 90 v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  2. Penna. Federation v. PRR Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
  3. United States v. Railway Employees' Department of American Federation of LaborDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1923
  4. Arneson v. DennyDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1928
  5. Pennsylvania System Board of Adjustment of Brotherhood of Railway & Steamship Clerks v. Pennsylvania R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1924

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API