Arneson v. Denny

Decision Date18 April 1928
Docket NumberNo. 332.,332.
Citation25 F.2d 993
PartiesARNESON v. DENNY et al.
CourtU.S. District Court — Western District of Washington

W. R. Crawford, of Seattle, Wash., for plaintiff.

John H. Dunbar, Atty. Gen., and H. C. Brodie, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendants.

Before statutory court, composed of GILBERT, Circuit Judge, and NETERER and CUSHMAN, District Judges.

CUSHMAN, District Judge.

The court heretofore held there would be no determination of the application for an interlocutory injunction until it was shown whether there had been service upon the Governor of the State of Washington of notice of the application for such injunction, in compliance with Section 266 of the Judicial Code, Comp. Stat., § 1243 (28 USCA § 380). Proof of service has now been made as follows:

"In the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Washington, Southern Division.

"E. A. Arneson, Plaintiff, v. John C. Denny, James P. Neal, and C. Rea Moore, as the Department of Public Works of the State of Washington, Defendants.

"No. 332, In Equity.

"Proof of Service of Notice.

"Comes now the plaintiff in the above-entitled cause, and, in compliance with the ruling made on February 24, 1928, files his proof of service of the notice as required by section 266 of the Judicial Code upon Hon. Roland H. Hartley, Governor of the state of Washington, and Hon. John H. Dunbar, Attorney General of the state of Washington, and John C. Denny, James P. Neal, and C. Rea Moore, as the department of public works of the state of Washington; such proof of service of notice aforesaid is shown by the affidavit of W. R. Crawford, solicitor of the plaintiff, and said affidavit is attached to and is made a part of the said return of the plaintiff. W. R. Crawford, Solicitor for Plaintiff."

Indorsed:

"Received copy of above this 27th day of February, 1928. H. C. Brodie, Atty. for Defendants."

"Affidavit of W. R. Crawford.

"(Same title.)

"State of Washington, County of King, — ss.:

"W. R. Crawford, being first duly sworn upon oath deposes and says: That on January 20, 1928, at Seattle, Washington, he deposited in the United States post office at the Federal Building at the corner of Third avenue and Union street, a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid, addressed to Hon. Roland H. Hartley, Governor of the state of Washington, Olympia, Wash., in which was inclosed a notice, a copy of which said notice is as follows:

"`Notice.

"`To Hon. Roland H. Hartley, Governor of the State of Washington, and Hon. John H. Dunbar, Attorney General of the State of Washington — Gentlemen:

"`This is to notify you, and each of you, that the District Court of the United States for the Western District, Southern Division, has set for hearing and determination in the federal courtroom at the Federal Building at Tacoma, Wash., a certain application for an interlocutory injunction in the case of E. A. Arneson v. John C. Denny et al., being cause No. 322 in equity, for January 28, 1928, at the hour of ten (10:00) o'clock a. m., under the provisions of section 266 of the Judicial Code. I have the order of said court, and will serve the defendants with a copy of the order, complaint and motion for interlocutory injunction. Kindly acknowledge receipt of notice.

"`Dated at Seattle, January 20, 1928. W. R. Crawford, Solicitor for Plaintiff.

"`Office address, 325 Lumber Exchange Building, Seattle, Wash.'

"That the affiant did on January 20, 1928, deposit in the United States post office at the Federal Building at the corner of Third avenue and Union street, Seattle, Wash., a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid, addressed to Hon. John H. Dunbar, Attorney General of the state of Washington, Olympia, Wash., in which was inclosed a notice, a copy of which said notice is set out herein above. That this affiant did on January 21, 1928, serve on John C. Denny, James P. Neal, and C. Rea Moore, as the department of public works of the state of Washington, defendants herein, by serving said defendants at Olympia, Wash., copies of the order entered by the above court on January 19, 1928, and the complaint, the motion for the interlocutory injunction, and the affidavits attached to

said motion. W. R. Crawford.

"Subscribed and sworn to before me this 27th day of February, 1928. Morris B. Sacks, Notary Public in and for the ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Osage Tribe of Indians v. Ickes, Civil Action No. 10787.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Columbia
    • 19 Marzo 1942
    ...appeal dismissed sub nom. Buck v. Case, 62 S.Ct. 579, 86 L.Ed. ___ (dismissal on equitable ground of "unclean hands"); Arneson v. Denny, D.C.W.D.Wash., 25 F.2d 993, 995 (dismissal for lack of notice to indispensable The lack of uniformity in dealing with such preliminary questions may be se......
  • Bradley v. Milliken
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • 13 Octubre 1970
    ...287 U.S. 378, 393, 53 S.Ct. 190, 77 L.Ed. 375; Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 157, 161, 28 S.Ct. 441, 52 L.Ed. 714; Arneson v. Denny, 25 F.2d 993 (W.D.Wash.); James v. Almond, 170 F.Supp. 331, 341-342 (E.D. Va.), appeal dismissed, 359 U.S. 1006, 79 S.Ct. 1146, 3 L.Ed.2d 987; Bevins v. Prinda......
  • PUERTO RICO INTERN. AIRLINES, INC. v. Colon
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Puerto Rico
    • 10 Diciembre 1975
    ...v. Sovereign Camp, 306 U.S. 573, 59 S.Ct. 709, 83 L.Ed. 994 (1939); McCrimmon v. Daley, 418 F.2d 366 (7 Cir. 1969); Arneson v. Denny, 25 F.2d 993 (D.C. Wash.1928). 3 See Huffman v. Pursue, Ltd., 420 U.S. 592, 95 S.Ct. 1200, 43 L.Ed.2d 482 (1974); Samuels v. Mackell, 401 U.S. 66, 91 S.Ct. 76......
  • Kister v. Ohio Board of Regents
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Ohio
    • 7 Enero 1974
    ...relief requested in the complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 2281; cf. Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 28 S.Ct. 441, 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908); Arneson v. Denny, 25 F.2d 993 (W.D.Wash.1928). However, even assuming that the Court could grant the relief requested in the complaint, we do not believe that we can con......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT