Legal Opinion

Ernesto Chacon v. James D. Hodgson, Individually and in His Capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of Labor

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided July 11, 1972No. 71-1189PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SWYGERT, Chief Judge.

This suit concerns the requirements for resident participation introduced by the 1967 Amendments to the Economic Opportunity Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2737 et seq., formerly Title I, § 111 et seq., 78 Stat. 512 (1964). Plaintiffs seek a judgment declaring a regulation of the Manpower Administration of the Department of Labor, Manpower Administration Order 14-69 [hereinafter cited as MAO 14-69], invalid and injunctive relief to prevent the execution of a contract pursuant to it. Cross motions for summary judgment were filed. The district court granted the defendants’ motion and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Federal Trade Commission v. Mandel Bros.Supreme Court of the United States · 1959
  2. Atherton Mills v. JohnstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  3. Chacon v. SchultzDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1970

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Comprehensive Group Health Services Board Directors v. Temple University of the Commonwealth System of Higher EducationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1973
  2. Ernesto Chacon v. James D. Hodgson, Individually and in His Capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1972
  3. Opinion No. Oag 9-85, (1985), Wisconsin Attorney General Reports1985

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

Powered by the Exa API