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.
Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers et al. v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Co. et al., 1959 — 361 U.S. 810 · caselaw · US
General
Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers et al. v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Co. et al.
361 U.S. 810·Supreme Court of the United States·1959
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. 165.
Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers et al. v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Co. et al.
J. Hart Willis, Wayland K. Sullivan, Harold C. Heiss, Clarence E. Weiséll and V. C. Shuttlewonth for petitioners. M. E. Clinton and O. 0. Touchstone for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted limited to Question No. 1 presented by the petition which reads as follows:
“Whether a district court under circumstances where a dispute arising under the Railway Labor Act has been submitted by a railroad to the National Railroad Adjustment Board and an injunction against a- strike by employees is sought on authority of Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Chicago River and Ind. RR Co., 353 U. S. 30, may on the granting of an injunction impose reasonable conditions designed to protect the employees against a harmful change in working conditions during pendency of the dispute before the Adjustment Board by ordering that the. Railroad restore the status quo, or, in the alternative, pay the employees the amount they • would have been paid had,(,changes-in working 'conditions giving rise to the dispute not been made.” .