Mitchell v. Anderson

Good Law
235 F.2d 638
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 30, 195614327_1California5,270 words

Opinion

Opinion

235 F.2d 638 James P. MITCHELL, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, Appellant, v. Harold S. ANDERSON, Jr., Robert W. Anderson, and Alfred F. Ohl, Individually and as Copartners, Doing Business as H. S. Anderson Company, Appellee. No. 14327. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. August 25, 1955. Rehearing Denied July 30, 1956. Stuart Rothman, Solicitor, Bessie Margolin, Dept. of Labor, Washington, D. C., George E. Duemler, Los Angeles, Cal., William W. Watson, Washington, D. C., Dept. of Labor, Kenneth C. Robertson, Regional Atty., Dept. of Labor, San Francisco, Cal., for appellant. Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, Sherman Welpton, Jr., W. French Smith, James J. Ryan, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellees. Before STEPHENS and FEE, Circuit Judges, and WIIG, District Judge. STEPHENS, Circuit Judge. 1 A place called Darwin, less than 150 population, lies in the Mojave desert in California, and may be likened to a trading post for those who are engaged directly and indirectly in the mining industry of the Anaconda Copper Mining Company whose "Darwin Mine" is located about a mile from the town and is operated in two shifts under approximately 250 employees. The product…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.