State ex rel. Ford v. Young
Montana Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, Hill County; W. B. Rhoades, Judge. Two Proceedings by tbe State, on tbe relation of S. C. Ford, Attorney General, against C. W. Young and others. From an order in each suit refusing to dissolve a temporary injunction, defendants appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Holloway
The state, on the relation of the attorney general, seeks by injunction to close certain buildings in the city of Havre, which it is alleged are being used as common brothels or bawdy-houses. The defendants have appealed from an order (in each suit) refusing to dissolve a temporary injunction.
No question is raised as to the scope of the injunction issued. [1] Appellants’ only contention is that the attorney general is without authority to institute these proceedings, and in support of this contention they invoke the provisions of Chapter 95, Laws of 1917. Section 2 of that Chapter includes…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- City of Georgetown v. THE ALEXANDRIA CANAL COMPANY, &C.Supreme Court of the United States · 1838
- Coosaw Mining Co. v. South CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- People v. Truckee Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- Attorney General v. Jamaica Pond Aqueduct Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Minerd v. MargiottiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Darling Apartment Co. v. SpringerSupreme Court of Delaware · 1941
- Gas Products Co. v. RankinMontana Supreme Court · 1922
- Wilentz v. HendricksonNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1943
- Commonwealth v. KozlowskyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.