Case Name: Patrick J. Dooley, complainant-appellee, v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Company of Pennsylvania, a corporation, and Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees, an unincorporated association, defendants-appellants
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1942-04-23
Citations: 131 N.J. Eq. 468
Docket Number: 
Parties: Patrick J. Dooley, complainant-appellee, v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Company of Pennsylvania, a corporation, and Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees, an unincorporated association, defendants-appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Equity Reports
Volume: 131
Pages: 468–469

Head Matter:
Patrick J. Dooley, complainant-appellee, v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Company of Pennsylvania, a corporation, and Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees, an unincorporated association, defendants-appellants.
[Submitted February term, 1942.
Decided April 23d, 1942.]
Mr. Michael M. Kane (Mr. Abraham J. Slurgberg, of counsel), for the complainant-appellee.
Messrs. Collins & Corbin (Mr. Edward A. Marldey and Mr. Charles W. Broadhurst, of counsel), for the defendant-appellant Lehigh Yalley Railroad Company.
Mr. Amerigo D’Agostino (Mr. Kenneth J. Dawes and Mr. Clarence M. MuThollancL, of counsel), for the defendant-appellant Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Ereight Handlers, Express and Station Employees, an unincorporated association.

Opinion:
Pee Curiam.
The decree under review is affirmed, for the reasons expressed by Vice-Chancellor Egan in his opinion reported in ISO N. J. Kg. 75.
In the opinion, however, the learned Vice-Chancellor discusses the question of the right of John J. Buckley, general chairman of the System Board of Adjustment of the Brotherhood and of the Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, &c., itself to represent the clerks as bargaining agent with the employer Lehigh Valley Railroad Company. This question we do not consider necessary to the determination of the case and we consequently express no opinion thereon.
For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Parker, Bodine, Donges, Heiier, Perskie, Porter, Colie, Dear, Wells, Rafferty, Hague, Thompson, JJ. 13.
For reversal — None.