Legal Opinion
International Ass'n of Cleaning & Dye House Workers v. Landowitz
California Supreme Court
Decided June 9, 1942No. S. F. 16344PublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.
This action was brought on behalf of the plaintiff union by its president to enjoin the defendants from continuing to violate the provisions of Ordinance No. 5.491 of the city and county of San Francisco, known as the Cleaning and Dyeing Code. The plaintiff union is composed of retail cleaners who own and operate one man shops, and defendants are the individual owners and operators of cleaning and pressing shops in San Francisco. Ordinance No. 5.491 is a so-called “code of fair competition” which became effective on April 26, 1937, and was adopted pursuant to the provisions of Stats. 1935,…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- A. L. A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Davey v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- Wholesale Tobacco Dealers Bureau of Southern California, Inc. v. National Candy & Tobacco Co.California Supreme Court · 1938
- Penziner v. West American Finance Co.California Supreme Court · 1937
- Southern Service Co. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.California Supreme Court · 1999
- Barquis v. Merchants Collection Assn.California Supreme Court · 1972
- Governing Board of Rialto Unified School District v. MannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- People Ex Rel. Mosk v. National Research Co. of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
- Lincoln v. Superior Court of L.A. Cty.California Supreme Court · 1943
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.