Rees v. City of Palm Springs
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtShepard, J.
By this action plaintiffs sought and obtained a judgment, enjoining enforcement of certain sections of an ordinance of defendant city purporting to “regulate” picketing. Defendants appeal.
The facts as shown by the record before us are, in general, as follows: November 14, 1956, the city council of the city of Palm Springs enacted an ordinance under the title " Labor. ’ ’ Section 2910 thereof recites the growth of the city; its traffic difficulties in the business area; the necessity of preventing unreasonable obstruction on its streets, and declares that picketing in labor disputes has caused…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Thornhill v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Valentine v. ChrestensenSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- American Federation of Labor v. SwingSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- In Re BellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- McKay v. Retail Automobile Salesmen's Local Union No. 1067California Supreme Court · 1940
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Schwartz-Torrance Investment Corp. v. Bakery & Confectionery Workers' UnionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
- Wollam v. City of Palm SpringsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
- People v. GreenAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 1965
- Manning v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
- Schwartz-Torrance Inv. v. Bakery & Confectionery Wrks. Un.California Supreme Court · 1964
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.