Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Transportation-Communication Employees Union v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 1966 — 383 U.S. 905 · caselaw · US
General
Transportation-Communication Employees Union v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
383 U.S. 905·Supreme Court of the United States·1966
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 652.
Transportation-Communication Employees Union v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
Milton Kramer and Lester P. Schoene for petitioner. James A. Wilcox for respondent. Clarence M. Mulholland, Edward J. Hickey, Jr., and Richard R. Lyman for Railway Labor Executives’ Association, as amicus curiae, in support of the petition.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 10th Cir. Motion for leave to file supplemental petition for writ of certiorari granted. Petition for writ of certiorari is also granted.