Legal Opinion

Crookham v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided January 25, 1978No. C77-1030PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION

MANOS, District Judge.

The plaintiff has brought this action under the court’s diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (1970), and seeks the enforcement of certain employee protection provisions of Title V of the Regional Rail Reorganization Act of 1973 (RRRA), 45 U.S.C. §§ 771-779 (Supp. V 1975). The defendant maintains that employee claims under Title V of the RRRA can only be heard by the National Railroad Adjustment Board, and it has therefore moved for summary judgment on the ground the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.

I

The RRRA consolidated the assets of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Andrews v. Louisville & Nashville RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Slocum v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
  3. Order of Railway Conductors of America v. PitneySupreme Court of the United States · 1946

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Local 194 C & T, United Transportation Union v. Consolidated Rail Corporation and United Transportation UnionCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1982
  2. Leibitzke v. Consolidated Rail Corp.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1982
  3. Consolidated Rail Corp. v. American Train Dispatchers Ass'nDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. Crookham v. Consolidated Rail CorpCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1980
  5. Johnson v. Aeropure Acquisition, Inc.District Court, D. South Carolina · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API