Norman Breeland v. Southern Pacific Company and E. D. Moody

Good Law
231 F.2d 576·37 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2265·1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 4607
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 12, 195514670California1,483 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fee, J.

This is an action for damages on account of claimed breach of contract whereby plaintiff was employed as a brakeman by the Southern Pacific Company. Employment was pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement between defendant and the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen. Breeland alleged that he was discharged from his employment wrongfully and without just cause and in violation of this agreement. Damages were claimed for loss of wages and seniority, pension and hospital benefits.

Before answering, Southern Pacific filed a motion for summary judgment, which was denied March 1, 1954, by Hon. Michael J. Roche, United States District Judge. Immediately after this, on March 11, 1954, Southern Pacific filed answer setting up as a separate defense that Breeland had failed to submit or process his grievance within a one-year period as required by Article 58 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement in force during the employment of plaintiff. The answer also contained a separate defense that the action was barred by the Statute of Limitations since the discharge occurred on December 2, 1949, while the complaint was not filed until December 22, 1953.

On December 29, 1954, Southern Pacific…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.