Legal Opinion
O'ROURKE v. Waterfront Commission
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided January 30, 1954PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WEINFELD, District Judge.
This action is another attack upon the Constitutionality of the Waterfront Com mission Act. 1 The particular section of the law challenged by these plaintiffs is Article V of the Act, which requires that pier superintendents and hiring agents who respectively supervise and select the longshoremen for hire must be licensed by the Waterfront Commission. The article further provides that an applicant may be denied a license when he (a) is found to lack good character and integrity, or (b) has, without subsequent pardon, been convicted of specified crimes {except that the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Ex Parte PoreskySupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Standard Oil Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Osage Tribe of Indians v. IckesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1942
- Linehan v. Waterfront Commission of New York HarborDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1953
- Staten Island Loaders, Inc. v. Waterfront Commission of New York HarborDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1953
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- De Veau v. BraistedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1958
- State v. KnoeflerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1982
- Bell v. Waterfront Commission of New York HarborCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1960
- Hazelton v. MurraySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1956
- Bradley v. Waterfront Com'n of New York HarborDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1955
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.