Reader Ad Slot
Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
John L Lewis — Part 25
Page 88
88 / 109
RE: JOHN L. LEWIS, ETAL co
HARRY FISHVTICKE, ET AL Court should be dismissed. The Circuit
ve. JOHN L. LEIS, ET AL Court of Appeals affirmed the Lower Court's
(Continued) decision and did not diamiss the temperary
injunction.
a
The second case involves the contention af LEWIS that the perman-
ent injunction should not have been issued and was erroneously issued by
the lower Court in view of the fact that the complainant had not maintained
the status quo in thet that body had called an international convention and
elected new international officers when previously LEWIS had secured a m-
jority of signatures of members in favor of indefinitely postponing the in-
ternstional convention. :
The printed remrd inthe first case inthe Appellate Court con-
sisted of an abstract; statement: brief in argument; and reply brief of the
appellant, JOHN L. LEWIS. Also an additional abstract and brief of t he
appellee, HARRY FISHWICK. The printed record of the second case in Appellate
Court consists of an abstract of record end statement brief in argument for
the appellant, JOHN L, LEVIS; also reply brief of eppellees and additional
abstract for the appellees. All these printed documents are voluminous.
The result of both appeals was, lower court was upheld in both in-
ances retaining in effect + e temporary injuncion and approving the per-
manent injunction. The two opinions of the Circuit Court of Appeal contain
a brief concise mummary of the facts and the daw and are reported in the
following citations: ‘
"258, Illinois AppeRate Court Reports, 402
206, Illinois Appellate Court Reports, 230"
In view oft he voluminous neture of the case record and piead-
ings in this case, copies of the procesdings are at this time not being
secured. It appears that they would have little value except as background
information in connection with instant case, in view of the fact thet the
case involves a dispute within the U. WM. W. of A. union end is not between
members of the U. M. W. and the Progressive Mine Workers.
ae |
Reveal the original PDF page, then click a word to highlight the OCR text.
Community corrections
No user corrections yet.
Comments
No comments on this document yet.
Bottom Reader Ad Slot
Bottom Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Continue Exploring
Agency Collection
Explore This Archive Cluster
Broad Topic Hub
Topic Hub
letter
bureau
Related subtopics
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic