Court Injunction Research Articles

Federal Civil Procedure. Sixth Circuit Holds That Federal Court Should Abstain from Deciding a Nonparty's First Amendment Challenge to a State Court Injunction. Gottfried v. Medical Planning Services, Inc., 142 F.3d 326 (6th Cir. 1998)

Federal Civil Procedure. Sixth Circuit Holds That Federal Court Should Abstain from Deciding a Nonparty's First Amendment Challenge to a State Court Injunction. Gottfried v. Medical Planning Services, Inc., 142 F.3d 326 (6th Cir. 1998)

The Siren Song of the Elderly: Florida's Nursing Homes and the Dark Side of Chapter 400

Nursing homes perform a vital function in the long-term care continuum by providing nursing care around the clock to the elderly and disabled. By entrusting these institutions with society's frailest members, the general population relies on government agencies and their regulations to ensure that the elderly receive quality care. States expect quality care, but providers often lack the financial support and regulatory guidance.Recently, the conflict between reimbursement and quality care received national attention. Vencor, the U.S.'s second largest nursing home chain, attempted to terminate its Medicaid contracts and evict all its Medicaid residents. Executives explained that the contract terminations and resident evictions were strategies to make room for higher paying private pay residents. Faced with state, and potentially federal, fines, as well as a district court injunction and public outrage over the patient dumping, the company quickly abandoned its policy and apologized.

Full Faith and Credit and the Equity Conflict

This article examines whether the principles of full faith and credit require states to enforce other states' coercive equitable decrees to the same extent as judgments for money damages. In a recent decision, the Supreme Court held that a state court injunction barring a witness's testimony nationwide is not subject to full faith and credit elsewhere. Baker v. General Motors, 118 S. Ct. 657 (1998). This article suggests that both the Court's opinion and the two concurrences were unsatisfactory because the Court failed to address the key underlying issue of whether or to what extent courts may rely on state law to enjoin extraterritorial conduct. Much of this Article considers historical issues related to the extraterritorial jurisdiction of equity courts. It concludes that the issue will remain difficult to resolve unless some limitation is placed upon the longstanding view that state courts, under the guise of inherent equity power, may impose coercive orders that affect activity outside of that state. The concluding sections of the Article suggest three different approaches to resolution of the equity conflict, highlighting functional views of what the policy of preclusion should mean for the scope and effect of full faith and credit to equity decrees.

The Pullman Strike of 1894

The Pullman Strike of 1894

Trust wins injunction against strike action

High court injunction forces staff at newcastle city trust to call off four-day strike

Guidelines for physician-assisted suicide: can the challenge be met?

The question of legalizing physician-assisted suicide (PAS) has become a serious public debate. Growing interest in assisted suicide reflects a public increasingly fearful of the process of dying, particularly the prospect of dying a painful, protracted, or undignified death. PAS has been proposed as a compassionate response to unrelievable suffering, designed to give terminally or incurably ill individuals direct control over the timing, manner, and circumstances of their death. Although the American Medical Association remains firmly opposed to legalizing PAS, many physicians have begun to express support for the practice, and some have acknowledged that they have helped patients commit suicide despite the existing legal ban.As support for PAS grows, it becomes increasingly likely thatthe practice will be legalized in at least some statesin the not-too-distant future. In 1994, Oregon voters approved a referendum legalizing PAS for competent, terminally ill patients; a federal court injunction preventing the referendum from going into effect is currently on appeal, and it is widely expected that the injunction will be lifted.

Pharmacists' Response to Oregon's Death with Dignity Act

SUMMARYThe responses of Oregon pharmacists to Measure 16, the Oregon Death with Dignity Act, are discussed. The process through which a ballot measure can establish law in the state of Oregon is described. The passage of Measure 16 by a small majority of voters in 1994 was rapidly followed by a federal district court injunction which delayed implementation of the new law. Issues and concerns which pharmacists have identified relative to their role in Measure 16 are described. The pharmacist's right to refuse to participate in the processing of a Measure 16 prescription is discussed.

Determinants of Strike-Related Militancy: An Analysis of a University Faculty Strike

This article examines the determinants of differences in militancy among the union workers involved in a faculty strike at Temple University in 1990. Three forms of strike-related militancy are investigated: voting to continue the strike, voting to defy a court injunction, and picketing and related strike-support activities. The results indicate that job attitudes, attitudes toward the union, the perceived instrumentality of striking, attitudes toward militancy, social support, and some demographic variables were related to at least one form of militancy examined. The three forms of militancy, however, had different determinants. For example, social support and union commitment were significantly related to the more risky and confrontational forms of militancy, but not to voting to continue a strike.

Abortion Ruling in Quebec

Brahams summarizes a 1989 Quebec Court of Appeal decision in an abortion case and places the ruling in the context of worldwide trends in abortion regulation. In Tremblay v. Daigle (1989 Jul 26), the Quebec court upheld a lower court injunction banning a woman from having an abortion. The injunction had been obtained by the woman's former boyfriend, the putative father. Brahams discusses the current legal status of abortion in Canada, the Daigle court's reasoning, and how the British approach to the legal status of fathers and fetuses in abortion disputes differs from the Canadian. She also briefly summarizes recent abortion-related judicial and regulatory developments in the United States, Ireland, and France.A recent abortion ruling in Quebec could have far-reaching effects on abortion legislation in other countries and perhaps bolster the anti-abortion movement in the US. On July 26, 1989, the Quebec Court of Appeal upheld an injunction that banned a 21-year-old woman from obtaining an abortion. The injunction was obtained by the woman's boyfriend after the relationship was dissolved when she was in the 16th week of pregnancy. The upper limit for abortion in Canada is 20 weeks, but the woman was 21 weeks pregnant by the time the Court had reached its decision. Unlike the British courts, which deny putative fathers the legal right to interfere in decisions about abortion. Canada allocates a separate legal identity to the fetus. The Presiding Judge in the recent Canadian case stated that abortion "is not automatically an absolute right," and continued to say, "The unborn child is a living human entity distinct from the mother and has the right to life and protection from those who conceived it." The Quebec decision raises questions about whether physicians will feel compelled to inform male partners of a women's request for abortion.

The Use of High Court Injunctions to Control Noise Pollution

The Use of High Court Injunctions to Control Noise Pollution

Revolution by Evolution: The Changing Relationship Between GM and the UAW

The mid-1930s were indeed a time of revolution in America. While workers were engaging in sit-down strikes at General Motors the winter of 1936-1937, the company tried to block food shipments into the plant, turned off the heat, and called in police (who used tear gas and billy clubs) and tried to use court injunctions to remove striking workers from plant premises. After a bitter 44 days, GM finally acceded to the UAW's demand to negotiate a contract for its workers. Since then, the union's progress has been decidedly evolutionary a steady succession of gains in bread-andbutter issues that were supplemented year in and year out with progress in achieving other goals, particularly in social issues such as pensions and health care. More recently, we have made substantial gains in the areas of long-term job and income security, workplace health and safety, and greater input into the corporate decision-making process for our members. But when we step back and look over the span of some 50 years a wink in the eye in man's long struggle to improve his lot we can identify change that is cumulatively as dramatic and at least as far reaching as the bitter battles of the 1930s that established a beachhead for the United Auto Workers. In the 50 years since the UAW negotiated its first contract with General Motors, our relationship has evolved from one that was strictly adversarial to one that is more reasoned and geared toward problem solving. This change has occurred on both sides and 1, for one, believe it works to the advantage of the union, its members, and the corporation. As we look to the future, I think it worthwhile to take a brief glance at the past and to examine how we got to where we are today.

EFFECT OF DROUGHT AND GRASSHOPPERS ON ESTABLISHMENT OF DIALECTICA SCALARIELLA (ZELLER) (LEPIDOPTERA: GRACILLARIIDAE), A POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL CONTROL AGENT FOR ECHIUM PLANTAGINEUM L.

AbstractThe leaf‐mining moth, Dialectica scalariella, a potential biological control agent for Echium plantagineum, was released at 3 sites in New South Wales in winter 1980. Larvae in leaves of laboratory‐infested plants survived in the field despite sub‐zero temperatures. No D. scalariella were found at 2 of the sites subsequently. A population of D. scalariella was developing at the third site, but severe drought and attack by grasshoppers destroyed the Echium population and prevented establishment. A High Court injunction imposed on the program in July 1980 prevented further releases.

Ostracism on trial: The limits of individual rights

In 1947, a case of ostracism was tried in the Common Pleas Court of Wooster, county seat of Wayne County, Ohio. The plaintiff, Andrew J. Yoder, filed suit against an old Order Amish Bishop and two preachers asking for $40,000 in damages and a court injunction against a “boycott” that he alleged had been organized against hin throughout the Amish Church. The verdict was based on a concept of justice embodied inthe “reasonable man” doctrine. The jury intended to remedy severe“injustice” inflicted on the petitioner, a former member of the Old Order Amish Church, represented by the bishop and the preachers. The defendants, on the other hand, were steadfast in their belief that their actions were in compliance with the commandments of God— God's justice could not be questioned. This “Meidung” case, a public dispute between Amish mores and American Civil Law, could not solve the underlying issue of conflicting values. The trial led to results that were distasteful to the contesting parties, as well as to the jury, the presiding judge, the officials involved in executing the verdict, and the general public.

Ostracism on trial: the limits of individual rights

Abstract In 1947, a case of ostracism was tried in the Common Pleas Court of Wooster, county seat of Wayne County, Ohio. The plaintiff, Andrew J. Yoder, filed suit against an old Order Amish Bishop and two preachers asking for $40,000 in damages and a court injunction against a boycott that he alleged had been organized against hin throughout the Amish Church. The verdict was based on a concept of justice embodied inthe reasonable man doctrine. The jury intended to remedy severeinjustice inflicted on the petitioner, a former member of the Old Order Amish Church, represented by the bishop and the preachers. The defendants, on the other hand, were steadfast in their belief that their actions were in compliance with the commandments of God— God's justice could not be questioned. This Meidung case, a public dispute between Amish mores and American Civil Law, could not solve the underlying issue of conflicting values. The trial led to results that were distasteful to the contesting parties, as well as to the jury, the presiding judge, the officials involved in executing the verdict, and the general public.

Genetic manipulation: Rifkin battle lost, war undecided

A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals has ruled invalid a District Court injunction barring the National Institutes of Health from approving experiments involving the deliberate release of microorganisms containing recombinant DNA into the environment. However, a previously approved University of California field trial involving the release of genetically-modified, frost-resistant bacteria is still enjoined pending the District Court's approval of an environmental assessment produced by NIH. Budiansky's summary of the federal regulatory status of deliberate-release experiments is followed by extracts from the opinion of the Court of Appeals.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission

The newest federal regulatory body is the Consumer Product Safety Commission, whose responsibility includes drafting safety standards for a wide variety of household products and home furnishings. In addition to its broad jurisdiction, the Commission has been given some punch-the power to seek court injunctions to keep unsafe products from being marketed and to compel manufacturers to remove hazardous products that already have been placed on sale.

TECHNICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS OF SEWAGE EFFLUENT‐IRRIGATION WATER EXCHANGE, TUCSON REGION1

ABSTRACT.Many growing municipalities near irrigated agriculture are advocating a transfer of water now utilized for irrigation to municipal use. Alternatives are presented whereby this water can be transferred to municipal use in exchange for treated sewage effluent. The irrigation water would in effect be cycled through the municipal system prior to use on the farms.A case study of the Tucson region illustrates the relevant legal, economic and technical aspects. Effluent could be delivered to irrigators in Avra Valley at a cost less than that now paid for water pumped from declining water tables. In return the City of Tucson could import ground water now being used for irrigation through an existing pipeline which presently cannot be used because of a court injunction obtained by the irrigators. It appears that such an exchange agreement could be made without modification of existing statutory law.Similar exchange arrangements may prove to be feasible in other regions containing irrigated agriculture. Increased efficiency of water use can be achieved avoiding external effects which commonly arise in a direct transfer and are difficult to evaluate. High quality water is allocated to municipal use whereas nutrient‐rich sewage effluent is transferred to irrigation.

Courts: Federal Court Injunctions against State Criminal Proceedings: Civil Rights Act of 1957

Courts: Federal Court Injunctions against State Criminal Proceedings: Civil Rights Act of 1957

Disengagement from the Labor Contract: The Problem and a Proposal

The parochial view of union history is that of the effort of employees, in gradually increasing concert, to obtain from employers improved hours, wages, and conditions of employment. The vehicle of change is what we know as collective bargaining. The organization of employees in pursuit of contracts and improvements was confronted with a variety of legal barriers which effectively stifled substantial progress throughout the 19th century and beyond. The various state jurisdictions employed one or more theories of law to hold that concerted employee activity was illegal, and thus enjoinable.' Although thereafter some of the restraints on employee organization were removed, it was not until the elasticized commerce clause2 of the Constitution was brought into the play that organized labor achieved some protection for its means and its ends. The first significant step was the enactment of the Anti-Injunction Act in 1932.3 By prohibiting the issuance of federal court injunctions in labor disputes, the act gave organized employees the first substantial protection of their means. In 1935, the development of organized labor turned a corner when the federal government legislated a guarantee to organized labor of the ends it sought-the collective bargaining relationship.4 The National Labor Relations Act was primarily significant for its requirement that where a majority of employees in an appropriate unit so desired, their employer was compelled to recognize their designated representative and negotiate in good faith a collective bargaining agreement. The subsequent development of labor law and labor relations has had two major aspects. The first of these is the matter of the duties of employ-

Criminal Procedure: Search and Seizure: Federal Court Injunction against State Officer to Suppress Illegally Obtained Evidence in a State Court

Criminal Procedure: Search and Seizure: Federal Court Injunction against State Officer to Suppress Illegally Obtained Evidence in a State Court