Legal Opinion

Goldberg, Bowen & Co. v. Stablemen's Local 8760

California Supreme Court

Decided July 12, 1906No. S.F. No. 4194PublishedCited by 34 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.

This is an action for injunction to restrain the defendants, who are members of the Stablemen’s Union, Local No. 8760, from doing certain alleged damaging acts to plaintiff, which acts are mostly connected with what is called a “boycott” of plaintiff’s business by the defendants. A demurrer on the general ground that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and also on some special grounds, was interposed by defendants. The demurrer was overruled; and defendants declining to answer, judgment was rendered for plaintiff. From this judgment defendants appeal.

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Davitt v. American Bakers' UnionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Oxley State Co. v. Coopers' International Union of North AmericaU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Arkansas · 1896
  3. Frank & Dugan v. HeroldNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1902
  4. Allis Chalmers Co. v. Reliable LodgeU.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illnois · 1901
  5. United States ex rel. Guaranty Trust Co. of New York v. HaggertyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern West Virginia · 1902

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Truax v. CorriganSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  2. American Steel Foundries v. Tri-City Central Trades CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  3. J. F. Parkinson Co. v. Building Trades CouncilCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  4. McKay v. Retail Automobile Salesmen's Local Union No. 1067California Supreme Court · 1940
  5. Fenske Bros. v. Upholsterers International Union of North America, Local No. 18Illinois Supreme Court · 1934

29 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