You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Eureka Productions, Inc. v. Lehman

Citations: 302 U.S. 634; 58 S. Ct. 15Docket: No. 99

Court: Supreme Court of the United States; October 11, 1937; Federal Supreme Court; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York resulted in the granting of the appellees' motion to affirm, leading to the affirmation of the order that denied an interlocutory injunction. The decision references several precedents, specifically citing Alabama v. United States, United Gas Co. v. Public Service Commission, and National Accounting Co. v. Dorman. Additionally, it includes references to Mutual Film Corp. v. Ohio Industrial Commission and Mutual Film Corp. v. Kansas. These cases collectively support the court's ruling and rationale for affirming the lower court's decision.

Legal Issues Addressed

Affirmation of Lower Court's Decision

Application: The appellate court affirmed the lower court's denial of an interlocutory injunction, supporting the decision with references to multiple precedents.

Reasoning: The appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York resulted in the granting of the appellees' motion to affirm, leading to the affirmation of the order that denied an interlocutory injunction.

Citing Mutual Film Corp. Cases

Application: The court cited Mutual Film Corp. v. Ohio Industrial Commission and Mutual Film Corp. v. Kansas as part of the legal framework supporting the affirmation.

Reasoning: Additionally, it includes references to Mutual Film Corp. v. Ohio Industrial Commission and Mutual Film Corp. v. Kansas.

Precedential Support for Affirmation

Application: The court's ruling was supported by precedents, including decisions from Alabama v. United States, United Gas Co. v. Public Service Commission, and National Accounting Co. v. Dorman, which collectively justified the appellate court's decision.

Reasoning: The decision references several precedents, specifically citing Alabama v. United States, United Gas Co. v. Public Service Commission, and National Accounting Co. v. Dorman.