Swartz v. South Buffalo Ry. Co., Civ. No. 1010.
| Decision Date | 18 April 1942 |
| Docket Number | Civ. No. 1010. |
| Citation | 44 F. Supp. 447 |
| Parties | SWARTZ v. SOUTH BUFFALO RY. CO. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of New York |
Winton H. Church, of Buffalo, N. Y., for plaintiff.
Kenefick, Cooke, Mitchell, Bass & Letchworth, of Buffalo, N. Y. (Thomas R. Wheeler, of Buffalo, N. Y., of counsel), for defendant.
Defendant moves to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction in the court. Plaintiff is a citizen of this State and a resident of Buffalo. The defendant is a domestic corporation. The amount of controversy exceeds $3,000. The motion is based on lack of diversity of citizenship. Plaintiff sues to recover loss of wages resulting from unlawful discharge by the defendant. He was a freight conductor and bases his claims upon certain rules and regulations promulgated by the defendant. The causes of action set up in the complaint allege breach of contract.
There is no federal statute giving jurisdiction in the instant type of suit. The National Railway Labor Act, Chapt. 8, 45 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq., provides the establishment of a National Railroad Adjustment Board (sec. 153). Such Board is given jurisdiction, among other things, over disputes involving employees of the defendant corporation such as the plaintiff (Sec. 153(i) and also provides (sec. 153(p) that on the failure of the carrier to comply with an order of the Adjustment Board the aggrieved party Since there is no federal statute specially authorizing suit without action by the Railroad Adjustment Board, it must be found that this court has not jurisdiction for lack of diversity of citizenship.
Of course, aside from the remedy offered through the Railway Labor Act, the plaintiff can sue in the State courts. Moore v. Illinois Central Ry Co., 5 Cir., 112 F.2d 959, 967, upon which the plaintiff mainly relies, was reversed by the Supreme Court, 312 U.S. 630, 61 S.Ct. 754, 85 L.Ed. 1089. This case does not present a comparable state of facts. The question of diversity of citizenship as a basis for jurisdiction was not involved. The Supreme Court did say that procedure under the Railway Labor Act, supra, was not the prerequisite to filing a suit in court. It is not claimed here that it is. In the dissenting ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Delaware, L.&W.R. Co. v. Slocum
...Bryant, 263 Ky. 578, 92 S.W.2d 749;Burton v. Oregon-Washington, R.R. & Navigation Co., 148 Or. 648, 38 P.2d 72. See Swartz v. South Buffalo Ry. Co., D.C., 44 F.Supp. 447. Thus, the challenge to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court must fail, and the only remaining question is whether the f......
-
Delaware, L. & WR Co. v. Slocum
...these cases: Lane v. Union Terminal Co., D.C., 12 F.Supp. 204; Lund v. Woodenware Workers Union, D.C., 19 F.Supp. 607; Swartz v. South Buffalo R. Co., D.C., 44 F.Supp. 447; Malone v. Gardner, 4 Cir., 62 F.2d 15; First National Bank of Danville v. Phalen, 7 Cir., 62 F.2d 21, 88 A.L.R. 75; Gr......
-
Strawser v. Reading Co.
...and Western Railroad Co. v. Slocum, D.C., 56 F.Supp. 634; Barnhart v. Western Maryland R. Co., 4 Cir., 128 F.2d 709; Swartz v. South Buffalo R. Co., D.C., 44 F.Supp. 447. The Supreme Court dealt with the applicability of 28 U.S.C.A. § 41(8) in an analogous situation in American Federation o......
-
Kirby v. Pennsylvania R. Co.
...F. Ry. Co., 7 Cir., 1948, 171 F.2d 594, certiorari denied 1949, 337 U.S. 916, 69 S.Ct. 1157, 93 L. Ed. 1726. 2 Swartz v. South Buffalo Ry. Co., D.C.W. D.N.Y.1942, 44 F.Supp. 447. ...