Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Denver Milk Producers, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided May 19, 1947No. 15,776Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Stone

Temporary injunction in this case was issued on the basis of the allegations of the complaint. Permanent injunction must be justified by the evidence.

Counsel for plaintiffs in their brief urge reversal on the ground of assertedly tortious acts concerning which evidence was adduced at the trial. The acts upon which plaintiffs rely are set out in their brief and may be summarized as follows:

First. Threats to injure and destroy the business of plaintiffs unless they should sign union contracts. The only threats testified to were vague and general, such as the alleged statement to the owner of a…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Thornhill v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. American Federation of Labor v. SwingSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  3. Bakery & Pastry Drivers & Helpers Local 802 of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. WohlSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  4. Carpenters & Joiners Union, Local No. 213 v. Ritter's CafeSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  5. Hotel & Restaurant Employees' International Alliance, Local No. 122 v. Wisconsin Employment Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1942

4 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