COVINGTON MILLS ET AL.
v.
MITCHELL, SECRETARY OF LABOR, ET AL.

U.S. | 1956-05-14
No. 682
Mr. Justice Harlan took no part in the consideration or decision of this application.
351 U.S. 934 Supreme Court of the United States (1956) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Full opinion text not available for this case.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Mitchell v. Riegel Textile, Inc., 259 F.2d 954 (D.C. Cir. 1958)
    …injunction should not have been granted. The Secretary’s minimum wage determination was upheld on appeal. Mitchell v. Covington Mills, 97 U.S.App.D.C. 165, 229 F. 2d 506, certiorari denied 350 U.S. 1002, 76 S.Ct. 546, 100 L.Ed. 865, rehearing denied 351 U.S. 934, 76 S.Ct. 787, 100 L.Ed. 1462; Alabama Mills, Inc., v. Mitchell, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 257, 244 F. 2d 21, certiorari denied 355 U.S. 834, 78 S.Ct. 53, 2 L.Ed.2d 45. The Secretary after-wards moved in the District Court for an order requiring the plaintif…
  • Consol. Elec. Lamp Co. v. Mitchell, 259 F.2d 189 (D.C. Cir. 1958)
    …PER CURIAM. This case, which is similar in nature to Mitchell v. Covington Mills, 97 U.S.App. D.C. 165, 229 F. 2d 506, certiorari denied 1955, 350 U.S. 1002, 76 S.Ct. 546, 100 L.Ed. 865, rehearing denied 1956, 351 U. S. 934, 76 S.Ct. 787, 100 L.Ed. 1462, involves an industry-wide wage determination under the Walsh-Healey Act, 41 U. S.C.A. § 35(b), for the electric lamp industry. We think the principal issue here — the validity of the determination — is governed by the…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw