Skip to content


Lemke Vs. Homer Farmers Elevator Co. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number258 U.S. 65
AppellantLemke
RespondentHomer Farmers Elevator Co.
Excerpt:
.....u.s. 65 appeal from the district court of the united states for the district of north dakota syllabus decided on the authority of lemke v. farmers grain co., ante, 258 u. s. 50 . affirmed. page 258 u. s. 66 mr. justice day delivered the opinion of the court. the suit was brought by companies representing 692 elevators in the state of north dakota to enjoin the enforcement act, c. 138 of the laws of north dakota of 1919. this act was considered and passed upon in no. 456, just decided, ante, 258 u. s. 50 . the matter was heard before three judges, and a temporary injunction was granted upon the authority of the decree of the circuit court of appeals which we have just reviewed and affirmed. appeal from that order.....
Judgment:
Lemke v. Homer Farmers Elevator Co. - 258 U.S. 65 (1922)
U.S. Supreme Court Lemke v. Homer Farmers Elevator Co., 258 U.S. 65 (1922)

Lemke v. Homer Farmers Elevator Company

No. 604

Submitted November 14, 1921

Decided February 27, 1922

258 U.S. 65

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA

Syllabus

Decided on the authority of Lemke v. Farmers Grain Co., ante, 258 U. S. 50 . Affirmed.

Page 258 U. S. 66

MR. JUSTICE DAY delivered the opinion of the Court.

The suit was brought by companies representing 692 elevators in the State of North Dakota to enjoin the enforcement Act, c. 138 of the Laws of North Dakota of 1919. This act was considered and passed upon in No. 456, just decided, ante, 258 U. S. 50 .

The matter was heard before three judges, and a temporary injunction was granted upon the authority of the decree of the Circuit Court of Appeals which we have just reviewed and affirmed. Appeal from that order was taken to this Court. The facts are not materially different from those presented in the former case, and the reasons therein stated for the conclusion reached are controlling here, and need not be repeated.

The order of the district court is

Affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE HOLMES, MR. JUSTICE BRANDEIS, and MR. JUSTICE CLARKE dissent.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //