Road and Rail
Company Overview of Southern Railway Co. Mobile & Ohio RR Co.
Southern Railway Co. Mobile & Ohio RR Co. transports freight by rail. The company's lines carry raw materials, intermediate products, and finished goods in the southeast, east, and midwest to and from the rest of the United States and parts of Canada. The company also transports overseas freight through several Atlantic and Gulf Coast ports. Southern Railway Co. Mobile & Ohio RR Co. was formerly known as Norfolk Southern Railway Company and changed its name to Southern Railway Co. Mobile & Ohio RR Co. in September 2014. The company was incorporated in 1894 and is based in Norfolk, Virginia. Southern Railway Co. Mobile & Ohio RR Co. operates as a subsidiary of Norfolk Southern Corporation.
3 Commercial Place
Norfolk, VA 23510
Founded in 1894
Key Executives for Southern Railway Co. Mobile & Ohio RR Co.
Chief Financial Officer and Vice President
Chief Operating Officer and Executive Vice President
Chief Information Officer and Executive Vice President of Planning
Chief Marketing Officer and Executive Vice President
Vice President of Corporate Communications
Compensation as of Fiscal Year 2015.
Southern Railway Co. Mobile & Ohio RR Co. Key Developments
Norfolk Southern Railway Corp. Wins $7.73 Million Federal Contract
Dec 24 14
Norfolk Southern Railway Corp., Roanoke, Virginia, was awarded a $7,735,000 federal contract by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, for engineering and construction services for the NT connection track as part of the Southeast Louisiana Flood Control Project SELA 26 Florida Avenue Phase IV project.
Consolidated Rail Corp., Norfolk Southern Railway Co. and Csx Transportation Inc. Announces Law Suit
May 15 14
The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey declined to strike class allegations from a complaint filed by individuals and businesses that allegedly sustained economic losses when a train derailed and spilled toxic chemicals. It was not evident that the plaintiffs could not meet the requirements for maintaining a class action. On November 30, 2012, a train owned and operated by Consolidated Rail Corp., Norfolk Southern Railway Co. and CSX Transportation Inc. (collectively, the rail companies) derailed in Paulsboro, N.J. Four tank cars fell into Mantua Creek. Approximately 25,000 gallons of vinyl chloride was released into the water and the atmosphere. Several plaintiffs sued the rail companies on behalf of themselves and a class of individuals and businesses who incurred expenses and lost income as a result of evacuating or sheltering indoors. The complaint alleged the rail companies negligently and recklessly operated the freight train. The rail companies moved to strike the plaintiffs' class allegations. They argued the putative class was unascertainable and joinder was practicable. Inappropriateness of class treatment is not facially apparent. The district court found it was not clear that the plaintiffs would be unable to show that class members were ascertainable. The parameters of the city's evacuation and "shelter in place" zones that impacted putative class members could be defined through discovery. The persons residing or doing business within those parameters could be ascertained using public records. As the rail companies contended, those who evacuated or sheltered in place would have to prove they incurred economic losses. The possibility that some fact-finding might be necessary did not automatically preclude certification. The rail companies argued that the close geographic proximity of class members meant that joinder was practicable. The district court noted the cases the rail companies cited did not foreclose certification in a case involving a chemical spill that affects a limited area. Joinder is impracticable where the individual stakes in the litigation are so small that it is unlikely the plaintiffs will pursue individual lawsuits. The district court observed it was likely that a great number of class members sustained damages that were insufficient to merit the filing of separate lawsuits. The plaintiffs were entitled to conduct discovery on that issue. The motion to strike was premature. The district court concluded the viability of the plaintiffs' proposed class depended on factual matters that had to be developed through discovery.
Similar Private Companies By Industry
Recent Private Companies Transactions
|No transactions available in the past 12 months.|
Most Searched Private Companies
Sponsored Financial Commentaries