General
Diehl v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Co. et al.
348 U.S. 96099 L. Ed. 2d 749·Supreme Court of the United States·1955
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
March 14, 1955.
No. 246.
Diehl v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Co. et al.
Argued February-28, March 1, 1955.
Decided March 14, 1955.
Harry Montgomery Leet argued the cause for petitioner.
With him on the brief was Sheldon E. Bernstein.
Richard R. Lyman argued the cause for respondents.
With him on a brief were Clarence M. Mulholland and Edward J. Hickey, Jr. for the System Federation No. 96, Railway Employes’ Department, A. F. of L., et al., respondents.
Thomas Price Mikell and Harry E. Sprogell filed a brief for the Lehigh Valley Railroad Co., respondent.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Certiorari, 348 U. S. 860, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Per Curiam:
Upon the facts disclosed in the opinion of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 211 F. 2d 95, the applicable Acts of Congress, and the opinion of this Court in Oakley v. Louisville & Nashville R. Co., 338 U. S. 278, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed. Mr. Justice Reed dissents for the reasons given in the opinion of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Solicitor General Sobeloff, Assistant Attorney General Burger and Samuel D. Slade filed a memorandum for the United States, as amicus curiae, urging reversal.