ST. LOUIS-SAN FRANCISCO RAILWAY COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
RAILROAD YARDMASTERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appeal is dismissed as moot because the National Railroad Adjustment Board has issued a decision on the underlying dispute.
A union sued a railway to prevent the abolition of yardmaster positions, and the district court issued a preliminary injunction pending a decision by …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Preliminary Injunction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
The appellee union brought a suit to enjoin the appellant railway from proceeding with its announced intention to abolish certain yardmaster positions. This Court, reversing the district court, held that the dispute between the union and the carrier was within the jurisdiction of the National Railroad Adjustment Board. St. Louis, S. F. & T. Ry. Co. v. Railroad Yardmasters of America, 5 Cir., 328 F. 2d 749, cert. den. 377 U.S. 980, 84 S.Ct. 1886, 12 L.Ed.2d 748.
On August 5, 1964, the district court entered a preliminary injunction prohibiting the railroad from abolishing the yardmaster positions at Fort Worth, Texas, pending final determination by the National Railroad Adjustment Board. This appeal was taken by the railroad from the injunctive order, primarily on several jurisdictional grounds.
While the appeal was under submission but was undecided, the National Railway Adjustment Board, on April 8, 1965, made its award sustaining the claim of the yardmasters.
The tribunal which had jurisdiction over the controversy has decided it. The decision of the Board was the event upon which the injunction was conditioned. The injunction is no longer operative and the appeal has become moot. Therefore, the appeal is
Dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tyson v. Lt. Clarence J. Cazes, 363 F.2d 742 (5th Cir. 1966)
Authorities Cited
- R.R. Yardmasters of Am., AFL-CIO v. St. Louis, 377 U.S. 980 (U.S. 1964)
- Young v. United States, 377 U.S. 980 (U.S. 1964)
- ST. Louis v. R.R. Yardmasters of Am., Afl-Cio, 328 F.2d 749 (5th Cir. 1964)