Ex Parte Metropolitan Water Co. of West Virginia
Supreme Court of the United States
The facts, which involve the construction of § 17 of the Act of June 18, 1910, c. 309, 36 Stat. 539, 557, in regard to the practice to be pursued in courts of the United States in a case.whére an interlocutory injunction is applied for to restrain the enforcement, operation or execution of a state statute by restraining the action of any officer of the State, are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice White
This is a proceeding in mandamus, in which relief is sought against a district judge, acting in a certain cause as a circuit judge for the district of Kansas, and also against the Circuit Court of the United States for the district of Kansas. To a rule to show cause a return has been filed and the Kaw Valley Drainage District of Wyandotte County, Kansas, has also, by leave, answered the rule. The matter is now for decision upon a motion to make the rule absolute.
Summarily stated, the facts bearing upon the issue to be decided are as follows:
By § 17 of the act of June 18, 1910, ch. 309, 36…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ex Parte HardingSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
3Cited by59 opinions
- Ex Parte United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- United States Alkali Export Ass'n v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Gonzalez v. Automatic Employees Credit UnionSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Stratton v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.