Legal Opinion · Dissent

McDermott v. Bradford

District Court, W.D. Washington

Decided March 29, 1935No. 531Published

1Dissent

CUSHMAN, District Judge. (dissenting).

I am unable to concur in the decision of the majority.

This suit is one under title 28 USCA § 380 to enjoin defendants from the enforcement or attempt to enforce chapter 50, p. 119, of the Laws of the Extraordinary Ses*665sion of the Washington state Legislature, 1933, known as the “Washington State Industrial Recovery Act” (Laws 1933, Ex. Sess., p. 119, Rem. Rev. Stat. of Wash., 1934 Annual Pocket Part, §§ 7657- — 1 to 7657 — 10).

The majority holds that plaintiff’s hill should be dismissed and interlocutory injunction denied because plaintiff has not…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  2. Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  3. Pierce v. Society of SistersSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  4. United States v. L. Cohen Grocery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1921
  5. Terrace v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1923

19 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