Southern Railway Co. v. Watts

Background

Several lawsuits were brought under Section 266 of the Judicial Code, as amended by the Act of March 4, 1913, seeking preliminary and permanent injunctions. In the district court, a preliminary injunction was denied and a stay was granted until an application could be made to this Court. The parties asked this Court for emergency relief and for the cases to be advanced for earlier consideration. The opinion also lists the lawyers who represented the parties in the different numbered cases.

Reasoning

The Court addressed requests for an immediate stay and to move the cases up on the calendar. Noting that the District Court is familiar with the character of the case and this Court is not, the Court denied the motion for a stay here. It expressly left open the option for the parties to apply to the District Court for a short-term stay while the matter is pending here, if the District Court in its judgment deems such a stay appropriate. The Court granted the motion to advance the cases and set them for hearing on the first Monday in November.

Real world impact

This order means the Supreme Court will not provide emergency relief now, and any short-term pauses must be sought from the trial court. The cases have been moved up for a prompt hearing in November, so the underlying disputes will be considered sooner. Because this is a procedural scheduling and stay decision, it does not resolve the main legal claims.