Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen v. Bangor Aroostook Railroad Co, No. 353
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM; BLACK |
| Citation | 88 S.Ct. 437,389 U.S. 327,19 L.Ed.2d 560 |
| Parties | BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE FIREMEN AND ENGINEMEN et al. v. BANGOR & AROOSTOOK RAILROAD CO. et al |
| Decision Date | 11 December 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 353 |
v.
BANGOR & AROOSTOOK RAILROAD CO. et al.
Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., John Silard, Harriett R. Taylor, Isaac N. Groner, Harold C. Heiss, Donald W. Bennett, Alex Elson, Willard J. Lassers and Aaron S. Wolff, for petitioners.
Francis M. Shea, Richard T. Conway, James R. Wolfe and Charles I. Hopkins, Jr., for respondents.
The order of December 4, 1967, 389 U.S. 970, 88 S.Ct. 463, denying the petition for a writ of certiorari is vacated and the following order is entered:
PER CURIAM.
This case is a consequence of a dispute with respect to the scope of an arbitration award governing the manning of trains and engines in freight service. The union took the position that the award had no effect after 12:01 a.m., March 31, 1966. On March 28, the District Court for the District of Columbia issued a temporary restraining order forbidding a strike. On March 31, the union struck against a number of railroads. The District Court
Page 328
entered contempt orders, imposing substantial fines for alleged violation of its restraining order. The Court of Appeals ruled on various legal issues presented to it but remanded to the District Court to consider whether there had in fact been a contempt, and, also, if there was a contempt, whether it was 'of such magnitude as to warrant retention, in part or to any extent, of the coercive fine originally provided for in contemplation of an outright refusal to obey.'
Petitioners seek certiorari to review the adverse rulings made by the Court of Appeals. However, because the Court of Appeals remanded the case, it is not yet ripe for review by this Court. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. See Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Brothers & Company, 240 U.S. 251, 257—258, 36 S.Ct. 269, 271, 60 L.Ed. 629 (1916).
Petition for writ of certiorari denied.
Mr. Justice BLACK would grant the petition and set the case for argument.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Commonwealth of Pa. v. Local U. 542, Int. U. of Op. Eng., Civ. A. No. 71-2698.
...at 1073; Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Engineers v. Bangor and Aroostock R. Co., 127 U.S.App.D.C. 23, 380 F.2d 570, cert. denied, 389 U.S. 327, 88 S.Ct. 437, 19 L. Ed.2d 560 It is my duty, as the judge against whom a § 144 affidavit has been filed, to pass upon the legal sufficiency......
-
Duplan Corporation v. Deering Milliken, Inc., Civ. A. No. 71-306
...984 (1968); Brotherhood of Loc. Fire. & Eng. v. Bangor & Aroostook R. R., 127 U.S.App.D.C. 23, 380 F.2d 570, 576 (1967), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 327, 88 S.Ct. 437, 19 L.Ed.2d 560; Littleton v. DeLashmutt, 188 F.2d 973, 975 (4th Cir. 1951) (per curiam), cert. denied, 342 U.S. 897, 72 S.Ct. 22......
-
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Train, No. 74--1433
...68 S.Ct. 401; cf. Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen v. Bangor & Aroostook R.R., 127 U.S.App.D.C. 23, 35, 380 F.2d 570, 582, cert. denied, 389 U.S. 327, 88 S.Ct. 437, 19 L.Ed.2d 560 (1967). See also 17 Am.Jur.2d Contempt § 51 (1964); 42 Am.Jur.2d Injunctions § 340 112 See 28 U.S.C. § 2106 (1......
-
Latrobe Steel Co. v. United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO, AFL-CIO
...of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen v. Bangor & Aroostook RR., 127 U.S.App.D.C. 23, 380 F.2d 570, 583, 587 n. 37, cert. denied, 389 U.S. 327, 88 S.Ct. 437, 19 L.Ed.2d 560 (1967), do expressly discuss the impact of the reversal of an injunction on a coercive contempt judgment. Both of these ......
-
Commonwealth of Pa. v. Local U. 542, Int. U. of Op. Eng., Civ. A. No. 71-2698.
...at 1073; Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Engineers v. Bangor and Aroostock R. Co., 127 U.S.App.D.C. 23, 380 F.2d 570, cert. denied, 389 U.S. 327, 88 S.Ct. 437, 19 L. Ed.2d 560 It is my duty, as the judge against whom a § 144 affidavit has been filed, to pass upon the legal sufficiency......
-
Duplan Corporation v. Deering Milliken, Inc., Civ. A. No. 71-306
...984 (1968); Brotherhood of Loc. Fire. & Eng. v. Bangor & Aroostook R. R., 127 U.S.App.D.C. 23, 380 F.2d 570, 576 (1967), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 327, 88 S.Ct. 437, 19 L.Ed.2d 560; Littleton v. DeLashmutt, 188 F.2d 973, 975 (4th Cir. 1951) (per curiam), cert. denied, 342 U.S. 897, 72 S.Ct. 22......
-
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Train, No. 74--1433
...68 S.Ct. 401; cf. Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen v. Bangor & Aroostook R.R., 127 U.S.App.D.C. 23, 35, 380 F.2d 570, 582, cert. denied, 389 U.S. 327, 88 S.Ct. 437, 19 L.Ed.2d 560 (1967). See also 17 Am.Jur.2d Contempt § 51 (1964); 42 Am.Jur.2d Injunctions § 340 112 See 28 U.S.C. § 2106 (1......
-
Latrobe Steel Co. v. United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO, AFL-CIO
...of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen v. Bangor & Aroostook RR., 127 U.S.App.D.C. 23, 380 F.2d 570, 583, 587 n. 37, cert. denied, 389 U.S. 327, 88 S.Ct. 437, 19 L.Ed.2d 560 (1967), do expressly discuss the impact of the reversal of an injunction on a coercive contempt judgment. Both of these ......