Capital Service, Inc. v. United States District Court for Southern Dist. Of California, Central Division

198 F.2d 18, 30 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2495, 1952 U.S. App. LEXIS 3753
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJune 24, 1952
Docket260_1
StatusPublished

This text of 198 F.2d 18 (Capital Service, Inc. v. United States District Court for Southern Dist. Of California, Central Division) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Capital Service, Inc. v. United States District Court for Southern Dist. Of California, Central Division, 198 F.2d 18, 30 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2495, 1952 U.S. App. LEXIS 3753 (9th Cir. 1952).

Opinion

198 F.2d 18

CAPITAL SERVICE, Inc. et al.
v.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR SOUTHERN DIST. OF CALIFORNIA, CENTRAL DIVISION, et al.

Misc. No. 260.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

June 24, 1952.

Hill, Farrer & Burrill and Hyman Smith, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioners.

George J. Bott, General Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D. C., Charles K. Hackler, Chief Law Officer, 21st Region, Los Angeles, Cal., Norton J. Come, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D. C., in opposition of NLRB to motion for mandamus of petitioners.

Before DENMAN, Chief Judge, and ORR and POPE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner moves this court for a writ of mandamus to compel the respondent to convene a three-judge district court under 28 U.S.C. § 2281 for hearing Case No. 14142 HW in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, which is a suit for injunction brought by the National Labor Relations Board against the petitioner here.

It appears that a final judgment was entered on June 2, 1952, in Case No. 14142 HW and that an appeal from that judgment, with petitioner here as appellant, is now pending in this court, 198 F.2d 20.

Since the issue concerning the use of a three-judge court may be raised in the pending appeal, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. Roche v. Evaporated Milk Ass'n, 319 U.S. 21, 63 S.Ct. 938, 87 L.Ed. 1185.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Roche v. Evaporated Milk Assn.
319 U.S. 21 (Supreme Court, 1943)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
198 F.2d 18, 30 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2495, 1952 U.S. App. LEXIS 3753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/capital-service-inc-v-united-states-district-court-for-southern-dist-of-ca9-1952.