General
Superior Court of California in and for the County of Los Angeles et al. v. Lillefloren et al.
335 U.S. 906·Supreme Court of the United States·1949
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
January 10, 1949.
No. 191.
Superior Court of California in and for the County of Los Angeles et al. v. Lillefloren et al.
Russell E. Parsons argued the cause for petitioners.
With him on the brief was Harold W. Kennedy. Herbert S. Thatcher and David Sokol argued the cause for respondents.
With Mr. Thatcher on the brief were Henry C. Bodkin, J. Albert Woll and James A. Glenn for Lillefloren et al., respondents; and Mr. Sokol filed a brief for Sylvane et al., respondents. John C. Stevenson and Mathew O. Tobriner filed a brief for the California State Federation of Labor, as amicus curiae, urging that the case be dismissed.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
It appearing that there is a non-federal ground, independent of the federal ground, and adequate to support the judgment of the lower court, the case is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Fox Film Corp. v. Muller, 296 U. S. 207; Lynch v. New York ex rel. Pierson, 293 U. S. 52.