In a whistleblower action against Consolidated Rail Corp., a federal appeals court tackled an issue of first impression in rejecting Conrail’s arguments about lack of court jurisdiction in the matter. But it nevertheless affirmed dismissal based on plaintiff counsel’s failure to overcome an apparent ”clerical oversight” in the mailing of a complaint to a federal agency.

The bulk of Wednesday’s precedential opinion in Guerra v. Conrail examines whether a federal district court judge in New Jersey properly ceded jurisdiction to hear the rail worker’s case.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]