Opinion
December 1, 1938.
January 9, 1939.
Appeals — Moot questions — Permanent injunction — Expiration — Labor dispute — Act of June 2, 1937, P. L. 1198.
An appeal from a decree granting a permanent injunction was dismissed on the ground that the only questions raised had become moot by the expiration of the injunction, where it appeared that more than one hundred and eighty days had passed before the hearing in the case on appeal and that the assignments of error were predicated solely upon alleged violations of the Labor Anti-Injunction Act of June 2, 1937, P. L. 1198, by the court below, which provides that every permanent injunction issued in a case involving or growing out of a labor dispute shall expire at the end of one hundred and eighty days after the date on which the judgment is signed.
Argued December 1, 1938.
Before KEPHART, C. J., SCHAFFER, MAXEY, DREW, LINN and STERN, JJ.
Appeal, No. 211, Jan. T., 1938, from decree of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., June T., 1937, No. 4698, in case of McNeely Price Co. v. Stanley Grabowski et al. Appeal dismissed.
Bill in equity. Before McDEVITT, P. J.
Preliminary injunction granted. Final decree entered granting injunction. Defendants appealed.
Errors assigned, among others, were dismissal of exceptions.
Norman J. Griffin, with him William F. Regan, for appellants.
Roy Martin Boyd, for appellee.
The assignments of error are predicated solely upon alleged violations of the Labor Anti-Injunction Act (of June 2, 1937, P. L. 1198) by the court below. It is unnecessary to pass upon any of these questions because Section 16 of the Act provides: "Every permanent injunction issued in a case involving or growing out of a labor dispute shall expire at the end of one hundred eighty (180) days after the date on which the judgment is signed." The injunction decree in the present case was entered by the court below on January 7, 1938. More than 180 days had passed before the hearing in the case on appeal. Therefore, if the proceeding is governed by the Act, as appellants contend, the only questions raised have become moot by the expiration of the injunction: Winston et al. v. Ladner et al., 264 Pa. 548. And see Glen Alden Coal Co. v. Anthracite Miners et al., 319 Pa. 192; Brecht v. Board of Public Education, 330 Pa. 331; Moskowitz's Appeal, 324 Pa. 144; Com. ex rel. v. Mamatey, 257 Pa. 327; Faust v. Cairns, 242 Pa. 15.
Appeal dismissed at appellants' cost.