Supreme Court of the United States, 1931

Ex Parte Madden Bros., Inc.

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided May 25, 1931 · Per Curiam

283 U.S. 807; 51 S. Ct. 645; 75 L. Ed. 1426; 1931 U.S. LEXIS 215 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Mr.- E. W. MacPherran for petitioner., Messrs. Henry N. Benson, Charles E. Phillips, and John F. Bonner for respondent.

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

Badgley v. City of New York (2d Cir. 1979)
Badgley v. City of New York (2d Cir. 1979)
Estate of Lindquist (Cal. 1944)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Upon consideration of the return of the Honorable Joseph W. Molyneaux to the rule, hereto *808 fore issued to him, to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue directing and commanding him to vacate, annul, and set aside the order and decree of August 9, 1930, dismissing the bill of complaint in the case of Madden Bros., Inc., v. Railroad & Warehouse Commission of Minnesota et al., and to call to his assistance two other judges and proceed in the said cause according to and in compliance with the provisions of § 266 of the Judicial Code in order to hear and determine the application for an interlocutory injunction in said cause;

Mr.- E. W. MacPherran for petitioner. Messrs. Henry N. Benson, Charles E. Phillips, and John F. Bonner for respondent.

It is now here ordered that the said rule be, and the same is hereby, made absolute.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.