Legal Opinion
Lund v. Woodenware Workers Union
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided May 19, 1937PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NORDBYE, District Judge.
The defendants have appeared specially'for the purpose of moving to vacate and quash plaintiff’s application and motion for temporary injunction on the grounds, first, that this court does not have jurisdiction to entertain this suit or plaintiff’s application for temporary injunction because no ■federal question is involved and there is no justiciable controversy in this forum; and second, that this court is without jurisdiction to grant any temporary injunction or any injunctive relief for the reason that the bill fails to allege compliance with the provisions of the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Virginian Railway Co. v. System Federation No. 40Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Hurn v. OurslerSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- The Fair v. Kohler Die & Specialty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Shulthis v. McDougalSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Fur Workers Union, Local No. 72 v. Fur Workers Union, No. 21238Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
- Donnelly Garment Co. v. International Ladies' Garment Workers' UnionCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1938
- Blankenship v. KurfmanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1938
- International Union of Doll & Toy Workers v. Metal Polishers, Buffers, Platers & Helpers International UnionDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1960
- Oberman & Co. v. United Garment Workers of AmericaDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1937
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.