NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION et al
| NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY |
| PAMELA A. WITMER, PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION, ROBERT F. POWELSON, JOHN F. COLEMAN, JR., WAYNE E. GARDNER and JAMES H. CAWLEY |
| 2:2011cv01350 |
| October 25, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Pittsburgh Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Cathy Bissoon |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Railway Labor Act |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
21
ORDER denying 19 Motion to lift stay. Through an exercise of the Court's inherent authority, this case remains STAYED pending resolution of the state proceedings referenced in this Order, and the case again is ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED. See Order for further details. Signed by Judge Cathy Bissoon on 10/5/12. (dcd)
|
|
Filing
18
ORDER. Consistent with the discussions at today's Conference, and through an exercise of the Court's inherent authority, this case hereby is STAYED pending resolution of the related administrative proceedings before the PPUC. As and when appropriate, Plaintiff or Defendants may restore this action to the Court's active calendar upon application or by motion. See Order filed herewith for further details. Signed by Judge Cathy Bissoon on 4/13/12. (dcd)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Pennsylvania Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
