Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Employment Security Division

Montana Supreme Court

Decided May 6, 1981No. 80-182, 80-183Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Sheehy

I agree that the District Court acquired no jurisdiction. I disagree there is anything left in the case to litigate on remand.

My careful reading of the majority opinon does not disclose clearly what the majority is up to. The apparent result, which may seem preposterous, is that the cause is remanded to the District Court on the issue of work stoppage without an adversary party, the claimants. Moreover, the work stoppage issue on remand is to be litigated between the agency on the one side and the appellants on the other. Yet, these two parties, at all stages subject to review, agreed that a…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Stephens v. ConleyMontana Supreme Court · 1914
  3. State Ex Rel. Bennett v. BonnerMontana Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Haggerty v. Sherburne Mercantile Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Creek v. Bozeman Water Works Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1899

15 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