Dooley v. Lehigh Valley R. Co. of Pa.
| Decision Date | 23 April 1942 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 212, 213.,s. 212, 213. |
| Citation | 25 A.2d 893,131 N.J.Eq. 468 |
| Parties | DOOLEY v. LEHIGH VALLEY R. CO. OF PENNSYLVANIA et al. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Appeal from Court of Chancery.
Suit by Patrick J. Dooley against the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company of Pennsylvania and another to compel restoration of complainant's seniority rights as named defendant's employee, recover earnings lost because of deprivation of such rights, and restrain violation of a collective bargaining agreement. Decree for complainant, 130 N.J.Eq. 75, 21 A.2d 334, and defendants appeal.
Affirmed.
Collins & Corbin, of Jersey City (Edward A. Markley and Charles W. Broadhurst, both of Jersey City, of counsel), for appellant Lehigh Valley R. Co.
Amerigo D'Agostino, of Trenton (Kenneth J. Dawes, of Trenton, and Clarence M. Mulholland, of Toledo, Ohio, of counsel), for appellant Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees.
Michael M. Kane, of Jersey City (Abraham J. Slurzberg, of Jersey City, of counsel), for appellee.
The decree under review is affirmed for the reasons expressed by Vice-Chancellor Egan in his opinion reported in 130 N.J.Eq. 75, 21 A.2d 334.
In the opinion, however, the learned Vice-Chancellor discusses the question of the right of John J. Buckley, General Chairman of the System Board of Adjustment of the Brotherhood and of the Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, etc, itself to represent the clerks as bargaining agent with the employer Lehigh Valley Railroad Company. This question we do not consider necessary to the determination of the case and we consequently express no opinion thereon.
For affirmance: The CHIEF JUSTICE, Justices PARKER, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, PERSKIE, PORTER, and COLIE, and Judges DEAR, WELLS, RAFFERTY, HAGUE, and THOMPSON —13.
For reversal: None.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gunther v. San Diego & Arizona Eastern Railway Co.
...youngest in point of service." Dooley v. Lehigh Valley R. Co. of Penna., 130 N.J.Eq. 75, 21 A.2d 334, 335, affirmed per curiam, 131 N.J.Eq. 468, 25 A.2d 893. (Emphasis supplied.) (See also Siaskiewicz v. General Electric Co., 2 Cir., 166 F.2d 463, 465; Fine v. Pratt, Tex.Civ.App., 150 S. W.......
-
Owens v. Press Pub. Co.
...N.J.Eq. 508, 10 A.2d 168 (Ch.1940); Dooley v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Co., 130 N.J.Eq. 75, 21 A.2d 334 (Ch.1941), affirmed 131 N.J.Eq. 468, 25 A.2d 893 (E. & A.1942), certiorari denied 317 U.S. 649, 63 S.Ct. 45, 87 L.Ed. 523 (1942); Fagliarone v. Consolidated Film Industries, Inc., 26 A.2d 4......
-
Gainey v. Local 71, Intern. Broth. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, 240
...St. Joseph Belt R. Co., 229 Mo.App. 506, 77 S.W.2d 175; Dooley v. Lehigh Valley R. Co., 130 N.J.Eq. 75, 21 A.2d 334 (affirmed in 131 N.J.Eq. 468, 25 A.2d 893); Evans v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 191 Ga. 395, 12 S.E.2d 611; Grand International Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers v. Mills, 43 A......
-
Milk Drivers and Dairy Emp., Local 680 v. Cream-O-Land Dairy
...508, 512, 10 A.2d 168 (Ch.1940); Dooley v. Lehigh Valley R. Co., 130 N.J.Eq. 75, 81, 21 A.2d 334 (Ch.1941), affirmed 131 N.J.Eq. 468, 25 A.2d 893 (E. & A.1942); Cox, Rights under a Labor Agreement, 69 Harv.L.Rev. 601, 638--645 (1956). The employees presumably welcome the union's assistance.......