Oria L. Walls, John Jackson, Asa Zachery and E. D. Atkins v. Southern Railway Company

Fifth Circuit

Oria L. Walls, John Jackson, Asa Zachery and E. D. Atkins v. Southern Railway Company

351 F.2d 948

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedOctober 27, 1965

Docket21759_1

StatusPublished

This text of 351 F.2d 948 (Oria L. Walls, John Jackson, Asa Zachery and E. D. Atkins v. Southern Railway Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Oria L. Walls, John Jackson, Asa Zachery and E. D. Atkins v. Southern Railway Company, 351 F.2d 948 (5th Cir. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The complaint in this action, brought by employees of the Southern Railway Company was dismissed by the trial court on the ground that any injury or damage suffered by the appellants were such as should have been the subject of grievance procedures under the jurisdiction of the National Railway Adjustment Board. Appellants concede that a factual issue respecting the alleged discharge of the appellants must be resolved in their favor before the trial court had jurisdiction over the cause. They also concede that there was a further jurisdictional factual question relating to the alleged discrimination based on race. These factual determinations, having been made by the trial court, and being supported by substantial evidence on the record, cannot be set aside by us as clearly erroneous.

The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The complaint in this action, brought by employees of the Southern Railway Company was dismissed by the trial court on the ground that any injury or damage suffered by the appellants were such as should have been the subject of grievance procedures under the jurisdiction of the National Railway Adjustment Board. Appellants concede that a factual issue respecting the alleged discharge of the appellants must be resolved in their favor before the trial court had jurisdiction over the cause. They also concede that there was a further jurisdictional factual question relating to the alleged discrimination based on race. These factual determinations, having been made by the trial court, and being supported by substantial evidence on the record, cannot be set aside by us as clearly erroneous.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

351 F.2d 948, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oria-l-walls-john-jackson-asa-zachery-and-e-d-atkins-v-southern-ca5-1965.