Tunstall v. Brother of Locomotive Firemen, 323 U.S. 210 (1944)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Tunstall v. Brother of Locomotive Firemen, 323 U.S. 210 (1944)
Tunstall v. Brother of Locomotive Firemen & Enginemen No. 37 Argued November 14, 1944 Decided December 18, 1944 323 U.S. 210
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
1. The Railway Labor Act imposes on a labor organization, acting as the exclusive bargaining representative of a craft or class of railway employees, the duty to represent all the employees in the craft without discrimination because of race. Steele v. Louisville & Nashville R. Co., ante, p. 192. P. 211.
2. The federal courts have jurisdiction to entertain a nondiversity suit in which petitioner, a railway employee subject to the Railway Labor Act, seeks remedies by injunction and award of damages for the failure of the union bargaining representative of his craft to perform the duty imposed on it by the Act, to represent petitioner and other members of his craft without discrimination because of race. P. 212.
3. Petitioner’s cause of action is not excluded by the Railway Labor Act from the consideration of the federal courts. P. 213.
4. The right asserted by the petitioner is derived from the duty imposed by the Railway Labor Act on the bargaining representative, and is a federal right implied from the statute and the policy which it has adopted. P. 213.
5. The case is therefore one arising under a law regulating commerce, of which the federal courts are given jurisdiction by 28 U.S.C. § 41(8). P. 213.
6. The petitioner has no administrative remedy available, and the bill of complaint states a cause of action entitling him to relief. P. 213.
140 F.2d 35 reversed.
Certiorari, 322 U.S. 721, to review the affirmance of a judgment dismissing a complaint for want of jurisdiction.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Tunstall v. Brother of Locomotive Firemen, 323 U.S. 210 (1944) in 323 U.S. 210 323 U.S. 211. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=7LFTDKH7T49AKCF.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Tunstall v. Brother of Locomotive Firemen, 323 U.S. 210 (1944), in 323 U.S. 210, page 323 U.S. 211. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=7LFTDKH7T49AKCF.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Tunstall v. Brother of Locomotive Firemen, 323 U.S. 210 (1944). cited in 1944, 323 U.S. 210, pp.323 U.S. 211. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=7LFTDKH7T49AKCF.
|