TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

J.D. Spencer, Jr. v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company

J.D. SPENCER, Jr., Appellant, v. MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellee

J.D. Spencer, Jr. v. Mo. Pac. R.R. Co., 743 F.2d 627 (8th Cir. 1984)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
September 24, 1984
Docket
No. 84-1438
Judges
Ross, Henley, Bowman
Citations
743 F.2d 627117 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 29551984 U.S. App. LEXIS 18308

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was brought by J.D. Spencer, Jr., from the dismissal of his claim against Missouri Pacific Railroad Company. The district court, 581 F.Supp. 1220 , 1

dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm.

Spencer, an employee of the defendant, originally filed this action in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Missouri, alleging that the defendant and two unions conspired to interfere with his employment rights with respect to certain union rules and related contractual provisions. The defendant removed the case to the federal district court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441 . The district court denied a request by Spencer to have the case remanded to state court. The court held that the dispute was rooted in the collective bargaining agreement and was therefore governed by the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C. §§ 151 , et seq.

Thereafter, the defendant filed a motion for summary judgment alleging that the plaintiffs claims were “minor disputes” under the Act, and that such disputes were to be resolved by the National Railroad Adjustment Board.

See 45 U.S.C. § 153 . The court agreed and granted the defendant’s motion. Spencer now appeals the district court’s decision.

We have carefully studied the record in this case and believe that the fact findings of the district court were not clearly erroneous, and that the court was correct in its application of the law. In accordance with the rules of this court, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

See 8TH CIR.R. 14.

1

. The Honorable William L. Hungate, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1985: 11987: 11991: 119852026peak 1985 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Rehbein v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co.740 S.W.2d 181 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987)
  2. American Train Dispatchers Ass'n v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.627 F. Supp. 941 (N.D. Ind. 1985)
  3. Maylie v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.601 A.2d 308 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1991)

Most recent

  1. Maylie v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.601 A.2d 308 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1991)
  2. Rehbein v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co.740 S.W.2d 181 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987)
  3. American Train Dispatchers Ass'n v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.627 F. Supp. 941 (N.D. Ind. 1985)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Spencer v. Mo. Pac. R. Co., 581 F. Supp. 1220 (E.D. Mo. 1984) 4

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list