RAILWAY LABOR EXECUTIVES ASSOCIATION, PETITIONER,
v.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENTS, MISSOURI-KANSAS-TEXAS RAILROAD CO., ET AL., INTERVENORS

D.C. Cir. | 1991-04-11
No. 88-1391
Before WALD and BUCKLEY, Circuit Judges, and ROBINSON, Senior Circuit Judge.
929 F.2d 742 United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (1991)

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of intervenors’ petition for rehearing filed October 12,1989, and of the supplemental memorandum in support thereof filed March 27, 1991, it is

ORDERED by the court that inter-venors’ petition for rehearing be denied. Intervenors’ suggestion that the court’s opinion of August 29, 1989 (883 F. 2d 1079) be modified in light of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Norfolk & Western Ry. v. American Train Dispatchers Ass’n, — U.S. —, 111 S.Ct. 1156, 113 L.Ed.2d 95 (1991), is granted as follows:

At 883 F. 2d at 1082, delete the second full paragraph beginning “Our recent decision in Brotherhood of Railway Carmen....”, as well as the introductory phrase of the third paragraph, “Although that issue is squarely presented here, we find it inappropriate to consider the question because”. Insert the following introductory phrase at the beginning of the third paragraph: “We find, however, that”.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw