UNITED RAILROAD WORKERS DIVISION OF TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA ET AL.
v.
BALTIMORE & OHIO RAILROAD CO. ET AL.
UNITED RAILROAD WORKERS DIVISION OF TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA ET AL.
BALTIMORE & OHIO RAILROAD CO. ET AL.
364 U.S. 278
Supreme Court of the United States (1960)
Caution
Cited by 12 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for reconsideration in light of Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers et al. v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. Co., 363 U. S. 528.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gentile v. State Bar of Nev., 501 U.S. 1030 (U.S. 1991)…ct departed from prescribed standards. “Membership in the bar is a privilege burdened with conditions,” to use the oft-repeated statement of Cardozo, J., in In re Rouss, 221 N. Y. 81, 84, 116 N. E. 782, 783 (1917), quoted in Theard v. United States, 364 U. S. 278, 281 (1957). More than a century ago, the first official code of legal ethics promulgated in this country, the Alabama Code of 1887, warned attorneys to “Avoid Newspaper Discussion of Legal Matters,” and stated that “[n]ewspaper publications by an…
-
Rutland Ry. Corp. v. Bhd. OF Locomotive Eng'rs, 307 F.2d 21 (2d Cir. 1962)…ve Engineers, 266 F. 2d 335 (5 Cir. 1959) rev’d on other grounds 363 U.S. 528, 80 S.Ct. 1326, 4 L.Ed.2d 1379 (1960) (no section 6 notice) ; Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. United R. Workers, 271 F. 2d 87 (2 Cir. 1959) vacated and remanded on other grounds 364 U.S. 278, 80 S.Ct. 1609, 4 L.Ed.2d 1719 (1960) (no section 6 notice). Of the cases cited by the majority, only Hilbert v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 290 F. 2d 881 (7 Cir. 1961) cert. denied 368 U.S. 900, 82 S.Ct. 174, 7 L.Ed.2d 96 (1960) involved a Section 6 notic…1 / 3
-
PAN Am. World Airways, Inc. v. Flight Eng'rs' Int'l Ass'n, PAA Chapter, AFL-CIO, 306 F.2d 840 (2d Cir. 1962)…cago River & I. R. R., supra, 353 U.S. at 40, [*847] 77 S.Ct. at 635; Chicago R. I. & P. R. R. v. Switchmen’s Union, supra, 292 F. 2d at 65-66; Baltimore & O. R. R. v. United R. R. Workers, 271 F. 2d 87, 92 (2d Cir. 1959), remanded on other grounds, 364 U.S. 278, 80 S.Ct. 1609, 4 L.Ed.2d 1719 (1960). But where no compulsion exists under the Railway Labor Act, because its procedures have been exhausted, there can be no question of “accommodation.” The limitations of the Norris-La Guardia Act are plainly appl…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Bhd. of Locomotive Eng'rs v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas R.R. Co., 363 U.S. 528 (U.S. 1960)