Case Resources
Search this Case
in
Google Scholar
on the Web
Google
Web Search
MSN
Web Search
Yahoo!
Web Search
in the News
Google
News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google
Blog Search
Technorati
Blog Search
in other Databases
Google
Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Alabama Mills, Inc., et al., Appellants, v. James P. Mitchell, Secretary of Labor, et al., Appellees
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit. - 244 F.2d 21
Submitted April 2, 1957 Decided April 26, 1957
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia; Alexander Holtzoff, Judge.
Submitted on the brief by Messrs. Llewellyn C. Thomas, Washington, D. C., and W. Glen Harlan, Atlanta, Ga., for appellants.
Submitted on the brief by Asst. Atty. Gen. (George C. Doub, Messrs. Paul Sweeney and Arthur H. Fribourg, Attys., Dept. of Justice, and Miss Bessie Margolin, Asst. Sol., U. S. Dept. of Labor, for appellee Secretary of Labor. Mr. Edward H. Hickey, Atty., Dept. of Justice, at the time record was filed, also entered an appearance for appellee Secretary of Labor.
Submitted on the brief by Messrs. Arthur J. Goldberg and David E. Feller, Washington, D. C., for appellee Textile Workers Union of America, CIO.
Submitted on the brief by Mr. John W. Cragun, Washington, D. C., for appellee National Association of Cotton Manufacturers, and certain other appellees.
Before EDGERTON, Chief Judge, and WASHINGTON and DANAHER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment is affirmed, Judge Washington dissenting. Each member of the court adheres to the views he expressed in Mitchell v. Covington Mills, Inc., 97 U.S.App.D.C. 165, 229 F.2d 506.
Affirmed.