The opinion of the court was delivered by: Igoe, District Judge.
1. Plaintiff is a citizen and resident of the State of
Illinois. Defendant Santa Fe is a railroad corporation
organized under the laws of the State of Kansas and doing
business in Illinois. Defendant National Railroad Adjustment
Board, First Division, is an agency created by and pursuant to
the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq.
2. Plaintiff entered the employ of defendant Santa Fe as a
locomotive engineer on August 25, 1906, and continued in that
employment until October 9, 1924. He was a member in good
standing of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, an
unincorporated labor organization, which was and still is the
collective bargaining agent under the Railway Labor Act for
all persons employed as locomotive engineers by defendant
3. On October 9, 1924, an order was entered by the Judge of
the County Court of Cook County, Illinois, in a case then
pending in said Court entitled "In the Matter of Lawrence
Futhey, alleged insane, case No. 82640," adjudicating
plaintiff herein of unsound mind on the report of a medical
commission duly impanelled by said Court and committing
plaintiff to the State Mental Hospital at Kankakee, Illinois.
4. On June 26, 1925, plaintiff was paroled from said mental
hospital. Thereafter, a petition for restoration was filed by
plaintiff in the cause then pending in the County Court of
Cook County, Illinois, and on January 15, 1926, the Judge of
said Court entered an order restoring plaintiff to all the
rights and privileges of a sane person. Said order has never
been modified or vacated.
5. On January 18, 1926, plaintiff requested defendant Santa
Fe to reinstate plaintiff on the seniority roster of the
defendant and to restore him to duty as a locomotive engineer.
This request was handled with defendant by the duly authorized
officers of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers pursuant
to the provision of the Railway Labor Act. The defendant Santa
Fe refused to grant the request and refused to restore
plaintiff to the seniority roster of the Company or reinstate
him as a locomotive engineer.
6. On May 27, 1939, plaintiff, through the Brotherhood of
Locomotive Engineers, filed with the Secretary of the National
Railroad Adjustment Board, First Division, notice of intention
to file his ex parte submission claiming reinstatement in the
service of defendant Santa Fe as a locomotive engineer with all
rights restored and payment for time lost from January 15,
1926. Thereafter plaintiff filed his submission, docketed under
No. 7976, in which he stated that he was released from the
Kankakee Hospital but made no mention of the order of
restoration entered by the Judge of the County Court of Cook
County on January 15, 1926. Thereafter defendant Santa Fe filed
with the Secretary of the said First Division its reply to
plaintiff's ex parte submission in which defendant stated,
among other things, that plaintiff's insanity rendered him
unsafe for service as a locomotive engineer.
7. On October 4, 1939, a hearing was held in Docket No.
7976, Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers — The Atchison,
Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company, before the First Division
of the National Railroad Adjustment Board. Plaintiff and his
representative, the general Chairman of the Brotherhood of
Locomotive Engineers, were present at said hearing and were
given an opportunity to be heard. Neither made any reference to
the restoration order entered by the Judge of the County Court
of Cook County on January 15, 1926. On April 22, 1940, the said
Division, with a Referee sitting as a member of said Division
pursuant to the provisions of the Railway Labor Act, entered
its award No. 4716 in Docket No. 7976 denying the claim
asserted by plaintiff. The said award was as follows: "the
carrier's action in this case is supported by the Judgment of
the Cook County Court of October 9, 1924, which stands
unreversed and under the circumstances cannot be impeached
collaterally before this Division."
8. This action was commenced by the filing of a complaint
herein on October 28, 1949. The Second Amended Complaint
contains three counts. The jurisdiction of this Court is said
to be based upon the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of
the United States. Counts I and II, which were based upon an
alleged breach of contract, have been dismissed on plaintiff's
motion. Count III alleges that the award of the National
Railroad Adjustment Board, First Division, is contrary to fact
and contrary to law and prays that the award be vacated and
set aside and that defendant Board be directed to grant
plaintiff a rehearing.
1. This Court lacks jurisdiction to grant the relief prayed
in Count III of the Second Amended Complaint to direct the
defendant Board to vacate and set aside its award and to grant
plaintiff a rehearing on the merits. Under the provisions of
Section 3, First, (m) of the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C.A.
§ 153, First (m), the awards of the several divisions of the
Adjustment Board shall be final and binding upon both parties
to the dispute except insofar as they shall contain a money
award. Award No. 4716 of the First Division of the National
Railroad Adjustment Board, Docket No. 7976, dated April 22,
1940, does not contain a money award. Although the Second
Amended Complaint alleges that the jurisdiction of this Court
is based upon the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States, there is nothing in the record to suggest that
the First Division failed to proceed in accordance with the
provisions of the Railway Labor Act or that in the
consideration and determination of Docket No. 7976 it deprived
plaintiff of any rights constitutionally protected by the Fifth
Amendment. The Second Amended Complaint alleges that the award
was erroneous in that it failed to take into consideration
facts which were not before the Division. These allegations
state no basis upon which this Court may, in the exercise of
its statutory jurisdiction, review or set aside the award of
the Board. Washington Terminal Co. v. Boswell, 1942, 75
U.S.App.D.C. 1, 124 F.2d 235, affirmed 319 U.S. 732, 1943, 63
S.Ct. 1430, 87 L.Ed. 1694; Reynolds v. Denver & R.G.W.R. Co.,
10 Cir., 1949, 174 F.2d 673; Starke v. New York, Chicago, & St.
Louis Railroad Co., 7 Cir., 1950, 180 F.2d 569; Switchmen's
Union of North America v. National Mediation Board, 1943,
320 U.S. 297, 64 S.Ct. 95, 88 L.Ed. 61.
The Court finds the issues in favor of defendants and each
of them, sustains the motions of the defendants to dismiss the
Second Amended Complaint, and herewith enters judgment ...