• Facets (new session)
• Description
• Metadata
• Settings
  • Rule: ActivityStreamsMapasEquivalentb3sb3sifpdbprdf-labelfacetshttp://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/dbpedia#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/opencyc#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/umbel#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/yago#http://dbpedia.org/schema/property_rules#http://www.ontologyportal.org/inference/rules/SUMO#http://www.ontologyportal.org/inference/rules/WordNet#http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#ldpoplwebskos-transurn:det:rdf:labelvirtrdf-labelvirtrdf-urlNone
    
  • Inverse Functional Properties: Disabled (fastest) Apply to subjects only Apply to objects only Apply to both subjects and objects
  • "Same As": Disabled (fastest) Apply to subjects only Apply to objects only Apply to both subjects and objects (recommended) Apply to subjects, objects and predicates (not recommended on big datasets) Apply to predicates only (special use cases only)

About: United States v. United Mine Workers of America     Goto   Sponge   NotDistinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : yago:Whole100003553, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)

Type: ThingcaseLegal Caseunit of workLegal caseyago:WikicatUnitedMineWorkersOfAmericayago:CausalAgent100007347yago:LivingThing100004258yago:Object100002684yago:Organism100004475yago:Person100007846yago:PhysicalEntity100001930yago:Worker109632518yago:YagoLegalActoryago:YagoLegalActorGeoSupreme Court of the United States caseyago:Whole100003553 New Facet based on Instances of this Class

United States v. United Mine Workers of America, 330 U.S. 258 (1947), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court examined whether a trial court acted appropriately when it issued a restraining order to prevent a labor strike organized by coal miners. In an opinion written by Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson, the Court held that a restraining order and preliminary injunction prohibiting a strike did not violate the Clayton Antitrust Act or the Norris–La Guardia Act, that the trial court was authorized to punish the violation of its orders as criminal contempt, and that fines imposed by the trial court were warranted in the situation.