Walling v. Alabama Pipe Co.
District Court, W.D. Missouri
1Opinion of the Court
REEVES, District Judge.
The question presented for decision in the above case is whether the petition or claim is sufficiently full and complete to apprise the defendant of its nature and purpose. The action is brought by the administrator to enjoin the defendant from violating section 215, Title 29 U.S.C.A. Such proceeding is authorized by section 217 of said Title 29 U.S.C.A., as follows: “The district courts of the United States * * * shall have jurisdiction, for cause shown, * * * to restrain violations of section 215 of this title.”
Adverting to section 215, the following acts are…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. Universal Service Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1939
- St. Louis v. Knapp CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Tully v. HowardDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1939
- Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co. v. BaumanCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1934
3Cited by6 opinions
- Allstate Indemnity Co. v. DixonDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 2015
- Parker v. Transcontinental & Western Air, Inc.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1944
- Wycoff v. NicholsDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1962
- Walling v. StaffenDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1946
- Bowles v. LechtDistrict Court, D. Rhode Island · 1944
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.