1 F.Supp. 946 (E.D.Ill. 1931), 4385, Harris v. Missouri Pac. R. Co.

Docket Nº4385.
Citation1 F.Supp. 946
Party NameHARRIS v. MISSOURI PAC. R. CO. et al.
Case DateJuly 08, 1931
CourtUnited States District Courts, 7th Circuit

Page 946

1 F.Supp. 946 (E.D.Ill. 1931)

HARRIS

v.

MISSOURI PAC. R. CO. et al.

No. 4385.

United States District Court, E.D. Illinois

July 8, 1931

Beasley & Zulley, of East St. Louis, Ill., for plaintiff.

Page 947

Whitnel & Browning, of East St. Louis, Ill., for defendant Missouri Pac. R. Co.

P. K. Johnson, of Belleville, Ill., and C. E. Weisell, of Cleveland, Ohio, for all other defendants.

WHAM, District Judge.

By his bill the plaintiff seeks relief from a ruling of the general committee of adjustment of the Grand International Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, a labor union of which the plaintiff is a member, which ruling has been permitted to go into effect by the defendant Missouri Pacific Railroad, by which company the plaintiff is employed as a locomotive engineer, and which ruling affects detrimentally the plaintiff's rights of seniority. The case is now before the court upon the motions of the defendants to dismiss the bill. The principal ground of the motions is that the bill fails to state facts entitling the plaintiff to equitable relief.

It appears from the plaintiff's bill and the exhibits thereto attached and made a part thereof that the ruling which is complained of was made in a controversy between two local divisions of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers on the Missouri Pacific Railroad, namely Division 674 located at Dupo, Ill., and referred to as the Illinois Division, of which the plaintiff is a member, and Division 42 located at St. Louis, Mo., and referred to as the Missouri Division, of which the individual defendants are members. The controversy involved the rights of the members of the respective locals to man the runs between Dupo. Ill., and Poplar Bluff, Mo., via Gale, Ill., and Dexter Junction, Mo. The distance from Dupo to Gale is 114 miles, from Gale to Dexter Junction 50.91 miles, and from Dexter Junction to Poplar Bluff 26 miles. Of this territory the 114 miles between Dupo and Gale, in the territory of the Illinois Division, and the 26 miles between Dexter Junction and Poplar Bluff, in the Missouri Division, is the property of the Missouri Pacific Railroad, while the 50.91 miles of trackage between Dexter Junction and Gale belongs 46.91 miles to the Cotton Belt Railway and 4 miles to the Missouri-Illinois Bridge Company, over which the Missouri Pacific Railroad had trackage rights only. The question as to how the runs between Dupo and Poplar Bluff should be prorated between the two locals and whether the foreign trackage should be considered in the apportionment had been a live controversy for a number of years. On January 10, 1927, it was considered by the general committee of adjustment on an appeal by the Illinois Division from conflicting rulings on the subject by the general chairman, and was disposed of as follows:

'Moved and seconded-- Decision of General Chairman that foreign territory can not be prorated be sustained. Motion carried.

'Moved and seconded-- Decision of General Chairman giving prorate of foreign territory from Dexter Junction to Gale to Missouri Division be reverse. Motion carried.

'Moved and seconded-- The rights of the Mo. Div. engineers to continue the use of Cotton Belt rails between Dexter Junction and Gale for runs originating on Mo. Div. and terminating at Gale is conceded. Motion carried.

'Moved and seconded-- That the prorate of runs between Dupo and Poplar Bluff via Dexter Junction be not retroactive. Motion carried.'

The foregoing ruling was not appealed from by any of the interested parties and became effective. At the time of this ruling, Gale, Ill., was a division point on the Missouri Pacific Railroad, and by the decision of the general committee of adjustment the runs originating on the Missouri Division and terminating at Gale were conceded to the members of the Missouri Division. Subsequently, Gale was abolished as a terminal, whereupon the controversy was reopened by a letter from the officials of the Missouri Division, under date of December 19, 1927, to the general chairman of the general committee of adjustment, complaining that the abolishment of Gale as a terminal had destroyed the runs originating on the Missouri Division and terminating at Gale, which had been conceded to the Missouri Division in the former ruling, and again sought to have the foreign trackage between Dexter Junction and Gale prorated to the Missouri Division. It was further stated in the letter that the Missouri Division, after the abolishment of Gale as a division point, had sought an agreement with the Illinois Division, but that the Illinois Division would not agree to any departure from the ruling of the general committee of adjustment on January 20, 1927, and that, having failed to reach an agreement with the Illinois Division, the Missouri Division was by its letter, referring its complaint to the general committee of adjustment under the provisions of sections 34 and 35 of the standing rules.

Following the receipt of this letter by the general committee of adjustment, a special

Page 948

committee was appointed to consider the question presented therein. By its letter of January 17, 1929, the special committee reported that it had reviewed the file in the controversy, heard witnesses, and found that Gale had been abolished as a terminal on October 5, 1927, which had eliminated the runs held by the Missouri Division engineers between Poplar Bluff and Gale. Due to these circumstances, the special committee recommended:

'That Missouri Division engineers be given all mileage between Poplar Bluff and Gale on runs originating at Poplar Bluff and Gale on runs originating at Poplar Bluff and terminating at Dupo, originating at Dupo and terminating at Poplar Bluff.

'And that Illinois Division be given all mileage between Bush and Dexter Junction on runs originating at Bush and terminating at Poplar Bluff and originating at Poplar Bluff and terminating at Bush.

'Should Gale be re-established as a terminal for runs between Poplar Bluff and Gale, the runs will be manned by Missouri Division engineers.'

The recommendation of the special committee was adopted by and became the ruling of the general committee of adjustment.

From this ruling of the general committee of adjustment, the Illinois Division appealed to the Grand Chief Engineer on point of law under the provisions of section 29 of the standing rules, which section is hereinafter quoted with the other pertinent provisions of the constitution and by-laws. As a basis for its appeal, it set out that the effect of the ruling of the general committee of adjustment appealed from was to prorate the foreign territory between Gale and Dexter Junction to the Missouri Division, which was in direct conflict...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 practice notes
  • 31 Cal.2d 139, 19407, Demille v. American Fed. of Radio Artists
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court of California
    • December 16, 1947
    ...580, 587.]; State ex rel. Smith v. Kanawha County Court, 78 W.Va. 168 [88 S.E. 662, 664, 20 A.L.R. 1030]; Harris v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., 1 F.Supp. 946, 949; Shaup v. Grand International Brotherhood, 223 Ala. 202 [135 So. 327, 328]; Norfolk & W. Ry. Co. v. Harris, 260 Ky. 132, 137 [84 S......
  • 174 P.2d 523 (Wash. 1946), 29792, Leo v. Local Union No. 612 of International Union of Operating Engineers
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court of Washington
    • November 25, 1946
    ...association itself. * * *' [26 Wn.2d 529] In support of this rule, the editors of C.J.S. cite Harris v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., D.C.Ill., 1 F.Supp. 946; Hughes v. American Trust Co., 134 Cal.App. 485, 25 P.2d 491; Greenwood v. Building Trades Council of Sacramento, 71 Cal.App. 159, 233 P. 823......
  • 219 Cal.App.2d 479, 26884, Williams v. Inglewood Bd. of Realtors
    • United States
    • California California Court of Appeals
    • August 21, 1963
    ...587; State ex rel. Smith v. Kanawha County Court, 78 W.Va. 168, 88 S.E. 662, 664, 20 A.L.R. 1030; Harris v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., D.C., 1 F.Supp. 946, 949; Shaup v. Grand International Brotherhood, 223 Ala. 202, 135 So. 327, 328; Norfolk & W. R. Co. v. Harris, 260 Ky. 132, 137, 84 S.W.2......
  • 162 N.E.2d 250 (Ind. 1959), 29835, State ex rel. Indiana High School Athletic Ass'n v. Lawrence Circuit Court
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • November 18, 1959
    ...Ill. 98, 103, 101 N.E. 222, 45 L.R.A.,N.S., 353; Bostedo v. Board of Trade, 227 Ill. 90, 81 N.E. 42; Harris v. Missouri P. R. Co., D.C., 1 F.Supp. 946; Elfer v. Marine Engineers Beneficial Association, 179 La. 383, 154 So. 32. * * *' This court in the case of State ex rel. Givens, etc., v. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
18 cases
  • 31 Cal.2d 139, 19407, Demille v. American Fed. of Radio Artists
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court of California
    • December 16, 1947
    ...580, 587.]; State ex rel. Smith v. Kanawha County Court, 78 W.Va. 168 [88 S.E. 662, 664, 20 A.L.R. 1030]; Harris v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., 1 F.Supp. 946, 949; Shaup v. Grand International Brotherhood, 223 Ala. 202 [135 So. 327, 328]; Norfolk & W. Ry. Co. v. Harris, 260 Ky. 132, 137 [84 S......
  • 174 P.2d 523 (Wash. 1946), 29792, Leo v. Local Union No. 612 of International Union of Operating Engineers
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court of Washington
    • November 25, 1946
    ...association itself. * * *' [26 Wn.2d 529] In support of this rule, the editors of C.J.S. cite Harris v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., D.C.Ill., 1 F.Supp. 946; Hughes v. American Trust Co., 134 Cal.App. 485, 25 P.2d 491; Greenwood v. Building Trades Council of Sacramento, 71 Cal.App. 159, 233 P. 823......
  • 219 Cal.App.2d 479, 26884, Williams v. Inglewood Bd. of Realtors
    • United States
    • California California Court of Appeals
    • August 21, 1963
    ...587; State ex rel. Smith v. Kanawha County Court, 78 W.Va. 168, 88 S.E. 662, 664, 20 A.L.R. 1030; Harris v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., D.C., 1 F.Supp. 946, 949; Shaup v. Grand International Brotherhood, 223 Ala. 202, 135 So. 327, 328; Norfolk & W. R. Co. v. Harris, 260 Ky. 132, 137, 84 S.W.2......
  • 162 N.E.2d 250 (Ind. 1959), 29835, State ex rel. Indiana High School Athletic Ass'n v. Lawrence Circuit Court
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • November 18, 1959
    ...Ill. 98, 103, 101 N.E. 222, 45 L.R.A.,N.S., 353; Bostedo v. Board of Trade, 227 Ill. 90, 81 N.E. 42; Harris v. Missouri P. R. Co., D.C., 1 F.Supp. 946; Elfer v. Marine Engineers Beneficial Association, 179 La. 383, 154 So. 32. * * *' This court in the case of State ex rel. Givens, etc., v. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results