Eagle Glass & Manufacturing Co. v. Rowe

Citations

• 245 U.S. 275
• 38 S. Ct. 80
• 62 L. Ed. 286
• 1917 U.S. LEXIS 1735

Syllabus

<p>In a suit to restrain alleged concerted wrongful conduct upon the part of officials of a labor union, a temporary injunction should not be granted against those who .were not served and did not submit themselves to the jurisdiction.</p> <p>The bill alleged that the answering defendants had constituted other persons named as defendants their agents and representatives and had assisted and were supporting them in their alleged wrongful conduct. Held, in view of specific denials and supporting affidavits, not rebutted, that the Circuit Court of Appeals did not err in dissolving the temporary injunction.</p> <p>Where an application for a temporary injunction has been submitted upon affidavits taken ex parte, without opportunity for cross-, examination, and without any consent that the court proceed to final- determination of the merits, it is error for the Circuit Court of Appeals upon interlocutory appeal to direct a dismissal of the bill unless on its face there is no ground for equitable relief.</p> <p>The plaintiff’s bill set up a contract with its employees identical in form with the contract involved in Hitchman Coal & Coke Co. v. MitcKell, ante, 229, and charged defendants with the formation and pursuit of a scheme to “unionize” the plaintiff’s shop by interfering with its employees similar in nature, motive and methods to the scheme held illegal in that case. Held, that the bill stated an equitable cause of action, and that it was error for the .Circuit Court of Appeals to dismiss it on interlocutory appeal without affording plaintiff an opportunity to prove the allegations upon final hearing, as against the defendants within the jurisdiction.</p>