Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ex Parte George

Texas Supreme Court

Decided January 3, 1962No. A-8518Published

1DissentChief Justice Calvert

Further consideration of this matter has convinced me that relator should be discharged. Being thus convinced', I must dissent.

One may not be punished for contempt for violating a void court order, and a temporary injunction granted by a court having no jurisdiction of the subject matter is void. Ex Parte Twedell, 158 Texas 214, 309 S.W. 2d 834; Ex Parte Dilley, 160 Texas 522, 334 S.W. 2d 425.

There is in the record ample evidence, to support the trial court’s finding that a primary purpose of the picketing of the refinery at Texas City by NMU members was to induce OCAW members to breach their…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. San Diego Building Trades Council v. GarmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  2. Thornhill v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  3. Local 174, Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers v. Lucas Flour Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
  4. Charles Dowd Box Co. v. CourtneySupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  5. International Ass'n of MacHinists v. GonzalesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API