WALLING, WAGE & HOUR ADMINISTRATOR,

v.

NASHVILLE, CHATTANOOGA & ST. LOUIS RAILWAY; WALLING, WAGE & HOUR ADMINISTRATOR, V. PORTLAND TERMINAL CO.

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Standard Oil Co. of Cal., 332 U.S. 301 (U.S. 1947)
  …se of negligence and contributory negligence. Judgment was rendered accordingly. 60 F. Supp. 807. This the Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, 153 F. 2d 958, and we granted certiorari because of the novelty and importance of the principal question.2 329 U. S. 696. [*303] As the case reaches us, a number of issues contested in the District Court and the Circuit Court of Appeals have been eliminated.3 Remaining is the basic question of respondents’ liability for interference with the government-soldier relatio…
• Walling v. Portland Terminal Co., 330 U.S. 148 (U.S. 1947)
  …t of Appeals affirmed on the same ground, one judge dissenting. 155 F. 2d 215. See also Walling v. Jacksonville Terminal Co., 148 F. 2d 768. Certiorari was granted because of the importance of the questions involved to the administration of the Act. 329 U. S. 696. The findings of fact by the District Court, approved by the Circuit Court of Appeals, and not challenged here, show: For many years the respondent railroad has given a course of practical training to prospective yard brakemen. This training is a n…
• Walling v. Nashville, 330 U.S. 158 (U.S. 1947)
  …o them, and apparently intends in good faith to do so in the future.” 60 F. Supp. 1004, 1007-1008. The Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. 155 F. 2d 1016, one judge dissenting. We granted certiorari because of the importance of the questions decided. 329 U. S. 696. The finding of the District Court that the railroad had been complying with the Act in good faith in its business relations with the trainee clerks, stenographers, etc. is not challenged. No argument is here made that this is not adequate support…