Opinion

Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. National Mediation Board

  • 2 D.C. 124
Court
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Filed
Jul 1, 1935
Status
Published
Author
Bailey
On the bench
Bailey
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

MEMORANDUM

BAILEY, J.

It would seem that the Order of Railway Conductors and its members have an interest in this controversy equal to that of the plaintiffs, and if the Court should erroneously grant to the plaintiffs the relief sought by the bill of complaint, the Order of Railway Conductors would be deprived of the same rights as those of which the plaintiffs claim they are illegally deprived. In my opinion therefore the Order of Railway Conductors is a necessary party to this proceeding.

Apart from that, however, I think that this controversy is just the character of dispute which has been vested by the statute in the Mediation Board, and its decision is final ' unless capricious or arbitrary. I can see no grounds stated in the bill that would justify the Court in setting aside the decision of the Board as arbitrary or capricious or even erroneous. See opinion of Mr. Justice Gordon in Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, et al., v. *125 Georgia Southern and Florida Railway Company, et al., Equity 54632.

The motion to dismiss the bill of complaint should be sustained.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.