NOERR MOTOR FREIGHT v. EASTERN RAILROAD PRES. CONF.

Civ. A. No. 14715.

166 F.Supp. 163 (1958)

NOERR MOTOR FREIGHT, Inc., et al. v. EASTERN RAILROAD PRESIDENTS CONFERENCE et al.

United States District Court E. D. Pennsylvania.

July 22, 1958.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Dilworth, Paxson, Kalish, Kohn & Dilks, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs.

Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads, Philadelphia, Pa., for Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference.

Ballard, Spahr, Andrews & Ingersoll, Philadelphia, Pa., Hughes, Hubbard, Blair & Reed, New York City, for Carl Byoir & Associates, Inc.

Barnes, Dechert, Price, Myers & Rhoads, Philadelphia, Pa., for Pennsylvania R. Co., M. W. Clement and Walter S. Franklin.

Harold B. Bornemann, Philadelphia, Pa., for Lehigh & N. E. R. R. Co.

Dennis P. Donovan, New York City, for Canadian Nat. Railways.

Drinker, Biddle & Reath, Philadelphia, Pa., for Central R. R. Co. of N. J., Central R. R. Co. of Pa., Norfolk & W. Ry. Co., and Western Maryland Ry.

Carl E. Glock, Pittsburgh, Pa., and James B. Anderson, Philadelphia, Pa., for Fred W. Okie and Union R. R. Co.

Guckes, Shrader & Burtt, Philadelphia, Pa., for Baltimore and Ohio R. R. Co.

Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, Philadelphia, Pa., for Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co., Delaware, L. & W. R. R. Co., Erie R. R. Co., Lehigh & H. R. Ry. Co., New York, C. & St. L. R. R. Co., The Reading Co., R. W. Brown and Joseph A. Fisher.

Daniel Mungall, Jr., Philadelphia, Pa., for Boston & M. R. R.

Stradley, Ronon, Stevens & Young, Philadelphia, Pa., for Canadian Pac. Ry. Co., The Delaware & H. R. R. Corp., Maine Cent. R. R. Co., New York, N. H. & H. R. R. Co.

Myers, McVeigh, Mansfield & O'Brien, Philadelphia, Pa., for New York Cent. R. R. Co.

T. W. Pomeroy, Jr., Pittsburgh, Pa., and Paul Maloney, Philadelphia, Pa., for Pittsburgh & W. V. Ry. Co. and Charles J. Graham.

Saul, Ewing, Remick & Saul, Philadelphia, Pa., for Lehigh Valley R. R. Co.

White, Williams & Scott, Philadelphia, Pa., for New York, O. & W. Ry., and Lewis D. Freeman.


CLARY, District Judge.

This case is presently before the Court for entry of final judgment. The problems presented are (1) what injunctive relief shall be granted; (2) a proper assessment of damages, and (3) fixing a reasonable attorney's fee to be awarded the successful litigants, the plaintiffs. Considering point 2 first, there is no doubt, as is set forth in the body of the Opinion in this case handed down on October...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases