Summary

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Donovan v. City of Dallas — Opinion of the Court

Since we hold the order restraining petitioners from prosecuting their case in the federal courts was not valid, but was invalid, petitioners have been punished for disobeying an invalid order. Whether the Texas court would have punished petitioners for contempt had it known that the restraining order petitioners violated was invalid, we do not know. However, since that question was neither considered nor decided by the Texas court, we leave it for consideration by that court on remand.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Donovan v. City of Dallas — Opinion of the Court

And whether or not a plea of res judicata in the second suit would be good is a question for the federal court to decide. While Congress has seen fit to authorize courts of the United States to restrain state-court proceedings in some special circumstances, [10] it has in no way relaxed the old and well-established judicially declared rule [11] that state courts are completely without power to restrain federal-court proceedings in in personam actions like the one here. And it does not matter that the prohibition here was addressed to the parties rather than to the federal court itself.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Donovan v. City of Dallas — Opinion of the Court

Counsel Donovan, who is one of the petitioners here, excepted to the dismissal and then filed an appeal from that dismissal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Texas Court of Civil Appeals thereupon cited Donovan and the other United States District Court claimants for contempt and convicted 87 of them on a finding that they had violated its 'valid order.' [6] Donovan was sentenced to serve 20 days in jail, and the other 86 were fined $200 each, an aggregate of $17,200.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature