Document: 348 U.S. 37 75 S.Ct. 92 99 L.Ed. 46 NATIONAL UNION OF MARINE COOKS AND STEWARDS, a voluntary association, Petitioner,v.George ARNOLD, et al. No. 19. Argued Oct. 15, 1954. Decided Nov. 22, It took the following course: 1949—In Superior Court of State Washington for King County, Amend. 14. Mr.Norman Leonard, San Francisco, Cal., petitioner. Mr. John Geisness, Seattle, Wash., respondents. Justice BURTON delivered opinion Court. 1 The question before us is whether state appellate court violates either Due Process or Equal Protection Clause Fourteenth Amendment to Constitution United States when it dismisses an appeal from money judgment as reasonable measure safeguarding collectibility that judgment. For reasons hereafter stated, we hold does not and dismissal in instant case was such measure. 2 This litigation resulted 'black-listing' letter written by Harris agent petitioner, National Union Marine Cooks Stewards, 1949, persons able affect employment 95 respondents whose occupation stewards Alaska trade.1 3 respondents' libel action against petitioner Harris, seeking $20,000 damages each respondent, dismissed on demurrer. 4 June 9, 1950—On Supreme Washington, held libelous per se, reversed cause remanded trial. 36 Wash.2d 557, 219 P.2d 121. 5 September 4, 1951—In Court, total $475,000 rendered awarding $5,000 respondent. 6 5, filed notices but offered no supersedeas bond obtained stay proceedings.2 7 October 19, same case, began supplemental proceeding discover petitioner's available assets. 8 February 1952—In proceeding, evidence disclosed substantial assets showed $298,000 bonds be its possession California. ordered deliver these court's receiver, safekeeping, pending disposition appeal. 9 April upon failure bonds, adjudged contempt, stating "that said contemptuous conduct * frustrates enforcement herein receivership created order this *." 41 24, 246 1107, 1108. 10 May 17, 1952—The struck calendar merits, review adjudication contempt 'unless appellant sooner purges itself *.' 26, 1953—The 11 'adjudication affirmed, presently main shall dismissed, unless, within fifteen days date remittitur herein, union complying with trial requiring delivery receiver.' 42 648, 654, 257 629, 633. 12 27, 1953—In affidavit showing disbursements, 1952, had been $633,391.10, opposed receipts $413.280.90, cash assets, at end year, shrunk $90,389.84. 13 12, renewed their motion dismiss action. They supporting 'All (petitioner's) value are California two courts have refused entertain suit while pending.' 14 July 3, unless purged contempt. 15 August denied rehearing entered dismissing 16 March 8, 1954—This granted certiorari because significant relation constitutional issue judgments. 347 916, 74 516.3 17 There power under laws, (1) specified (2) adjudicate do so, (3) purge bonds. Those questions settled Washington. procedure which has culminated Amendment.4 18 We difficulty made anyone comparably situated treated differently due process law. To decide this, consider first whether, generally, amounts law where constitutes means If may then constituted means. 19 objection raised long ago considered Hovey v. Elliott, 167 409, 841, 215. In District Columbia went further attempted deprive defendant his right answer brought him. Having stricken defendant's answer, him punishment refusal court-appointed receiver certain funds were subject matter litigation. When New York later honor judgment, affirming Appeals York, deprived property without denying day court.5 20 go so far. Here court. cut off only statutory after full judge jury. supra, distinction anticipated room left open consideration cases like one us.6 21 While important must exercised discrimination, requirement process. Clawans, 300 617, 627, 57 660, 663, 81 843; Ohio ex rel. Bryant Akron Park District, 281 74, 80, 50 228, 230, 710; Reetz People Michigan, 188 505, 508, 23 390, 392, 47 563; McKane Durston, 153 684, 687 688, 913, 914—915, 38 867. 22 not, until now, passed constitutionality present, decided somewhat comparable issues. Where removed jurisdiction violation orders, upheld offending litigant's example, prisoner escaped custody pending, Cf. Eisler States, 338 189, 69 1453, 93 1897, 883, 70 181, 94 542. Similarly, prisoner's recapture, sustained revive Allen Georgia, 166 138, 525, 949. See also, Smith 97, 24 32; Handy, 27 Wash. 469, 67 P. 1094; Genet, 59 N.Y. 80; Com. Massachusetts Andrews, 97 Mass. 543.7 circumstances are, some degree, comparable. here violated issued safeguard would little value. Petitioner's out-of-state frustrated much escape frustrate attempting conviction. effectiveness jeopardized debtor, he extending frustration. regarded penalty imposed criminal exercise inherent use processes induce compliance reasonably aid execution. Furthermore, summarily dismissed. Petitioner allowed days, being itself. propriety remedial nature demonstrated situation Two proceedings there reach evidently insistence they any 25 indicated directed order, asset payment might realized dissipated placed protective custody. 26 appraising reasonableness State's noteworthy did seek apply satisfaction merely them safekeeping. satisfy it. comply dissipation Viewing light sustaining state's judicial process, rights filing bond, refuse orders find nothing 28 accordingly, affirmed. 29 Affirmed. 30 BLACK, whom DOUGLAS concurs, dissenting. 31 215, permit try merits disobeyed pay into registry controversy. denial all defend convert instrument wrong oppression. single ground turn over even lawsuit. I think Elliott doctrine applies equal force dismissal. True constitutionally required provide system review. But since done supreme final step trying therefore cannot conducted deny 'due process' requires. Cole Arkansas, 333 196, 201—202, 68 514, 517, 644, cited. And also abide Amendment's protection command deciding who can Cochran Kansas, 316 255, 62 1068, 86 1453. 32 legislatures broad forbid varied types courts. punish admittedly valid statutes unlimited. punishments obliterate clearly federal rights. See, e.g., Hill Florida, 325 538, 543, 65 1373, 1375, 89 1782. suppose contend convicted conventional crimes larceny embezzlement could punished compelling give up religious faith. person heard own defense stands equally firm base. McVeigh Wall. 259, 267, 'alien enemy' himself 'would blot our jurisprudence civilization.' inseparable liability sued. see reason why principle applicable upon. continuation opportunity order. By whatever other name called, punishment. legislature kind disobedience crime, certainly greater than legislature. pages 417—418, page 844, 33 summary, having haled finally should plaintiffs purpose offense plaintiff's claim defense. From beginning, meant every permitted antagonist appear prosecute. belongs all—good bad, laws not. reverse case. stated: "Enclosed list former members deserted during 1948 maritime strike organize dual organization leadership Sailors Pacific breaking destroying union. "While renegades completely discredited defeated, attempt obtain sections industry, particularly fishing season opens. "This information your guidance formulation membership constructive ways carrying progressive labor organization." Arnold Union, 559, 121, 122. appeal, double amount costs required. Wash.Rev.Code 1951, § 4.88.060. confirmatory rulings intervened: November 16, want question. 346 881, 136. 2, 1954—In Harris' separate raising largely issues 265 1051. '* nor life, liberty, property, law; laws.' U.S.Const. XIV, 1. deprivation present upheld, prohibited rather result produce evidence, rule procedure, justifying default Hammond Packing Co. 212 322, 349—354, 370, 379—381, 53 530; Peitzman City Illmo, Cir., 141 F.2d 956, 960—961. Bennett Bennett, 208 356, 359, 52 590; Young & Holland Brande Bros., 162 F. 663; Lawson Black Diamond Coal Mining Co., 44 1120. difference between power, hand, principal existence authority, other, accord favor illustrated whole line adjudicated cases. Georgia (Allen 140, 526, 949), called attention secured clause constitution mere grace giving authority way error 'Whether, justified refusing avail statute, involve fundamental summoned defense, actor invoking involved suit.' 423—424, 443, 444, 847, similar cases, Casebolt Butler, 175 Ky. 381, 194 S.W. 305; Lindsay Lindsay, 255 Ill. 442, N.E. 608; Henderson Henderson, 329 257, 107 N.E.2d 773. civil actions, presence essential decree absents jurisdiction, upheld. Bronk Bronk, Fla. 474, 35 So. 870.

Category: 0