# Haguer v. Committee for Industrial Organization

> Supreme Court of the United States · June 5, 1939 · 307 U.S. 496

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9419055

## Case

- **Full name:** HAGUE, MAYOR, Et Al. v. COMMITTEE FOR INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States
- **Decided:** June 5, 1939
- **Citations:** 307 U.S. 496; 4 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 501; 59 S. Ct. 954; 83 L. Ed. 1423; 1939 U.S. LEXIS 1067
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Butler
- **Judges:** Hughes, Butler, Roberts, Stone, McReynolds, Black
- **Cited by:** 1,793 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Yellow flag:** Questioned by Walinsky v. Kennedy, 94 Misc. 2d 121 (1977).
- Negative treatments: 2
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9419055

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that in federal civil rights cases punitive damages may be awarded even without an award of compensatory damages
- stating that parks “have immemorially been held in trust for use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions.”
- affirming facial invalidation of ordinance that did not "make comfort or convenience in the use of streets or parks the standard of official action" but enabled the licensor "to refuse a permit on his mere opinion that such refusal [would] prevent 'riots, disturbances or disor…
- noting that parks, as well as streets, “have immemorially been held in trust for the use of the public and, time out of mind, have been'used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public, questions”

## Opinion text

Mr. Justice Butler,
dissenting:
I am of opinion that the challenged ordinance is not void on its face; that in principle it does not differ from the Boston ordinance, as applied and upheld by this Court, speaking through Mr. Justice White, in Davis v. Massachusetts, 167 U. S. 43 , affirming the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, speaking through Mr. Justice Holmes, in Commonwealth v. Davis, 162 Mass. 510 ; 39 N. E. 113 , and that the decree of the Circuit Court of Appeals should be reversed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9419055. Public record. Not legal advice.