JOHN B. HECKENDORN, PETITIONER,

v.

THE UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Alice v. Herrlein, 526 F.2d 252 (7th Cir. 1975)
  …971).4 Since neither Kanakis nor Teklad was found in violation of the order, Mogul cannot be held liable as an aider or abettor of the named parties in violating the injunction. Garrigan v. United States, 163 F. 16, 23 (7th Cir. 1908), cert. denied, 214 U.S. 514, 29 S.Ct. 696, 53 L.Ed. 1063 (1909); Heyman v. Kline, 444 F. 2d 65, 66-67 (2d Cir. 1971); United Pharmacal Corp. v. United States, 306 F. 2d 515, 517-18 (1st Cir. 1962). Likewise, Mogul cannot be found liable as a successor in interest. The cases ho…
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Teamsters, 592 F.2d 921 (6th Cir. 1979)
  …1) The respondents’ disobedience of the orders of this Court was contemptuous thereof. Garrigan v. United States, C.C.A.7th (1908), 163 F. 16, 20 (relating to a charge of criminal contempt for violating a labor injunction), certiorari denied (1909), 214 U.S. 514, 29 S.Ct. 696, 53 L.Ed. 1063. (2) Whether the actions of the respondent Mr. Ellis were wilful is irrelevant in determining whether the respondents are in civil contempt of the orders of this Court. N. L. R. B. v. United Mine Workers of America, C.A…