Tomkins v. Paterson
District Court, W.D. Washington
At Law. Action by J. A. Tomkins against J. V. Paterson and another. On motion to strike from defendants’ answer the affirmative defense, or to compel defendants to elect whether to stand on their denial or on their affirmative' defense.
1Opinion of the Court
NFTERER, District Judge.
The plaintiff seeks to recover a penalty provided by section 5 of the Act of Congress of February 20, 1907, c. 1134, 34 Stat. 900, as amended March 26, 1910 (chapter 128, 36 Stat. 263 [U. S. Comp. St 1913, §§ 4244, 4247, 4250]), and alleges that, while a resident of British Columbia “laboring' at his trade as a mechanical engineer” near Vancouver, British Columbia, the defendants engaged him as a mechanical engineer at the wage of $300 a month, and he entered the employment of the defendant at Seattle, Wash., and further states:
“That at all of said times plaintiff was…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Spokane & Inland Empire Railroad v. CampbellSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- People ex rel. Crawford v. LothropSupreme Court of Colorado · 1877
- Seattle National Bank v. CarterWashington Supreme Court · 1895
- Glenn v. SumnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Allen v. Olympia Light & Power Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1895
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Coos Bay Lumber Co. v. CollierCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1939