Texas & NOR Co. v. Brotherhood of Ry. and Steamship Clerks, No. 5406.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtWALKER, BRYAN, and FOSTER, Circuit
Citation33 F.2d 13
PartiesTEXAS & N. O. R. CO. et al. v. BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS, etc., et al.
Docket NumberNo. 5406.
Decision Date10 June 1929

33 F.2d 13 (1929)

TEXAS & N. O. R. CO. et al.
v.
BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS, etc., et al.*

No. 5406.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

June 10, 1929.


33 F.2d 14

J. H. Tallichet, C. R. Wharton, and C. L. Carter, all of Houston, Tex., and W. B. Spencer and Victor Leovy, both of New Orleans, La. (C. L. Carter, Calvin B. Garwood, and John P. Bullington, all of Houston, Tex., on the brief), for appellants.

Carl G. Stearns and John H. Crooker, both of Houston, Tex., and Donald R. Richberg, of Chicago, Ill. (Fulbright, Crooker & Freeman, and T. H. Cody, all of Houston, Tex., on the brief), for appellees.

Before WALKER, BRYAN, and FOSTER, Circuit Judges.

WALKER, Circuit Judge.

The original bill in equity in this case was filed on July 25, 1927, by the Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees, Southern Pacific Lines in Texas and Louisiana (herein referred to as the brotherhood), a voluntary association consisting solely of railway clerks in the employ in the states of Texas and Louisiana of the Texas & New Orleans Railroad Company (herein called the railroad company), and H. W. Harper, in behalf of themselves and others of the class composed of railway clerks in the employ of the railroad company in the states of Texas and Louisiana, against the railroad company and named officers and agents of it. By an amendment of the bill, the railroad company became the sole party defendant. The bill contained allegations to the following effect: Since its organization in September, 1918, the brotherhood has been authorized by a majority of the railway clerks in the employ of the railroad company to represent them in all matters relating to their employment, and that representation was recognized by the railroad company in dealings between it and such railway clerks before and after the beginning of a controversy as to wages between the railroad company and such clerks, following the application of such clerks, made in November, 1925, by the brotherhood as their representative, for an increase of wages, and after the denial of that application by the railroad company and the reference of that controversy by the brotherhood to the United States Board of Mediation. While that controversy was pending before that board,

33 F.2d 15
the railroad company undertook, instigated, and encouraged the formation of a so-called "Company Union" of railway clerks in the employ of the railroad company, to be known as "the Association of Clerical Employees — Southern Pacific Lines" (herein called the association), and, through the railroad company's named general officers and agents having and exercising supervisory and directory powers over members of the brotherhood, endeavored in ways stated to influence, intimidate, and coerce members of the brotherhood to withdraw from it, and to make the association their representative in dealings with the railroad company in all matters relating to their employment, and by such means to prevent the railway clerks in the employ of the railroad company in Louisiana and Texas from freely, and without interference, influence, or coercion, designating, by collective action, their representative in dealings with the railroad company in reference to their employment. Pursuant to the prayer of the bill, and after a hearing following the issuance and service of a notice to show cause, the court, on August 3, 1927, issued a temporary injunction, which ordered

"That the defendant Texas and New Orleans Railroad Company (a corporation and common carrier owning, leasing, and operating certain railroads throughout the States of Texas and Louisiana), its officers, servants, and agents are hereby enjoined and restrained from in any way or manner interfering with, influencing, intimidating, or coercing plaintiffs or any of the approximately seventeen hundred clerical employees (and being the clerical employees described and referred to in plaintiffs' petition, which includes approximately seventeen hundred railroad clerks in the employ of the defendant Railroad Company on its lines throughout the States of Texas and Louisiana, except such clerical employees as are employed and engaged in its general office in the City of Houston, Texas, and in its general office in the City of New Orleans, Louisiana), with respect to their free and untrammeled right of selecting or designating their representatives for the purpose of considering and deciding any and all disputes between said clerical employees and the defendant Railroad Company; and further enjoining and restraining said defendant Railroad Company, its officers, servants, and agents from in any way or manner interfering with, influencing, intimidating, or coercing plaintiffs or any of said clerical employees herein referred to of their free and untrammeled right of self-organization.

"Nothing in this injunction shall be considered or construed as authority to prevent any employee of said defendant Railroad Company, in the class referred to, from organizing, joining, promoting, or fostering as many unions as he or they (meaning such employees in the class referred to) may desire, and in any way which he or they may desire, and with the assistance and aid of any of his fellow employees in any way and to any extent that said fellow employees (in the class referred to) may desire; nor shall anything in this injunction be considered or construed as authority or permission for any officer or agent of said company, or any...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • Bethlehem Steel Co. v. National Labor R. Board, No. 7503
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • May 12, 1941
    ...13 Texas & N. O. R. Co. v. Brotherhood of Railway & S. S. Clerks, 281 U.S. 548, 552, 571, 50 S.Ct. 427, 74 L.Ed. 1034; cf. Id., 5 Cir., 33 F.2d 13, 14 "The Board's order properly requires respondent to desist from interfering in any manner with its employees in the exercise of their right t......
  • United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. McCarthy, No. 8261.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • June 17, 1929
    ...his hand such as is here shown could not practice any substantial part of surgery at any time in the future because it had been determined 33 F.2d 13 that for some particular period he could not so do. Disability is not entirely a physical matter. Will power and condition of mind enter into......
  • National Labor Relations Board v. Waumbec Mills, No. 3528.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • August 20, 1940
    ...will effectuate the policies of this Act chapter". Texas & N. O. R. Co. v. Brotherhood of Railway & Steamship Clerks, 114 F.2d 235 5 Cir., 33 F.2d 13, affirmed, 281 U.S. 548, 50 S.Ct. 427, 74 L.Ed. 1034. Such a restoration of the situation as it would have been had the unfair labor practice......
  • Russell v. Edgewood Independent School Dist., No. 14497
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas
    • July 27, 1966
    ...Co., D.C., 24 F.2d 426; Id., 5 Cir, 25 F.2d 873, 876, affirmed sub nom. Texas & N.O.R. Co. v. Brotherhood of Ry. and S.S. Clerks, 5 Cir., 33 F.2d 13; 281 U.S. 548, 50 S.Ct. 427, 74 L.Ed. 1034. The right, of course, is abstract, and the applicant must show himself entitled to equitable relie......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • Bethlehem Steel Co. v. National Labor R. Board, No. 7503
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • May 12, 1941
    ...13 Texas & N. O. R. Co. v. Brotherhood of Railway & S. S. Clerks, 281 U.S. 548, 552, 571, 50 S.Ct. 427, 74 L.Ed. 1034; cf. Id., 5 Cir., 33 F.2d 13, 14 "The Board's order properly requires respondent to desist from interfering in any manner with its employees in the exercise of their right t......
  • United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. McCarthy, No. 8261.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • June 17, 1929
    ...his hand such as is here shown could not practice any substantial part of surgery at any time in the future because it had been determined 33 F.2d 13 that for some particular period he could not so do. Disability is not entirely a physical matter. Will power and condition of mind enter into......
  • National Labor Relations Board v. Waumbec Mills, No. 3528.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • August 20, 1940
    ...will effectuate the policies of this Act chapter". Texas & N. O. R. Co. v. Brotherhood of Railway & Steamship Clerks, 114 F.2d 235 5 Cir., 33 F.2d 13, affirmed, 281 U.S. 548, 50 S.Ct. 427, 74 L.Ed. 1034. Such a restoration of the situation as it would have been had the unfair labor practice......
  • National Labor Relations Board v. Bradford Dyeing Ass, No. 588
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • May 20, 1940
    ...of Nelson. 7 Cf. Texas & N.O.R. Co. v. Brotherhood of Ry. Clerks, 281 U.S. 548, 557, 571, 50 S.Ct. 427, 74 L.Ed. 1034, affirming, 5 Cir., 33 F.2d 13, affirming Brotherhood of Railway Clerks v. Texas & N.O.R. Co., D.C., 24 F.2d 426; Id., D.C., 25 F.2d 873; Id., D.C., 25 F.2d 876, 877, 878. S......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT