From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rittle v. R.E.A. Express

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Oct 24, 1966
367 F.2d 578 (5th Cir. 1966)

Opinion

No. 23164.

October 24, 1966.

Delmar V. Rittle, Fort Lauderdale, Fla., for appellant.

Marcus M. Curry, New York City, Francis W. Sams, Paul Sams, Miami, Fla., for appellee.

Before BROWN, GEWIN and GOLDBERG, Circuit Judges.


On this appeal the appellant Rittle complains of the final judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida dismissing his complaint on the ground that the district court did not have jurisdiction of the subject matter of the suit.

The appellee is a carrier within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq. The appellant submitted his claims and grievances against his employer, the appellee, to the National Railroad Adjustment Board which rendered a decision against him. In the district court the appellee presented motions to dismiss and for summary judgment supported by an affidavit and exhibits. The court granted the motions and dismissed the action with prejudice.

A review of the record clearly demonstrates that the district court was correct in holding that it lacked jurisdiction and that the decision of the National Railroad Adjustment Board was final. Gunther v. San Diego Arizona E.R. Co., 382 U.S. 257, 86 S.Ct. 368, 15 L.Ed.2d 308 (1965); Republic Steel Corp. v. Maddox, 379 U.S. 650, 85 S.Ct. 614, 13 L.Ed.2d 580 (1965); Union P.R. Co. v. Price, 360 U.S. 601, 79 S.Ct. 1351, 3 L.Ed.2d 1460 (1959); Hodges v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co., (5 Cir. 1966) 363 F.2d 534.

The judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

Rittle v. R.E.A. Express

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Oct 24, 1966
367 F.2d 578 (5th Cir. 1966)
Case details for

Rittle v. R.E.A. Express

Case Details

Full title:Delmar V. RITTLE, Appellant, v. R.E.A. EXPRESS, Appellee

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Oct 24, 1966

Citations

367 F.2d 578 (5th Cir. 1966)

Citing Cases

Williams v. Intern. Ass'n of Machinists Aerospace

This court has consistently followed Gunther in holding that district courts have no authority to review the…

Southern Pacific Company v. Wilson

Therefore the district court had no jurisdiction to review the Board's award in the present case. See also…