Alba Trading Co. v. Constants

181 Misc. 778, 47 N.Y.S.2d 138, 1944 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1724
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 20, 1944
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 181 Misc. 778 (Alba Trading Co. v. Constants) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Alba Trading Co. v. Constants, 181 Misc. 778, 47 N.Y.S.2d 138, 1944 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1724 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1944).

Opinion

Pecora, J.

Disposition of this motion to dismiss the supplemental complaint herein was held in abeyance pending certification by the court to the Administrator of the Office of Price Administration of the existence of the present action, pursuant to subdivision (d) of section 205 of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942 [U. S. Code, tit. 50, Appendix, § 925, subd. (d)] [779]*779Following such certification, the court was advised by letter dated November 30, 1943, signed by the Chief Enforcement Attorney, filed herewith, that the question of intervention had been studied and that the Administrator had decided not to intervene. As indicated by the court in its opinion herein, dated November 15, 1943 (181 Misc. 248), the language of subdivision (e) of section 205 of the Emergency Price Control Act [U. S. Code, tit. 50, Appendix, § 925, subd. (e)] is susceptible of the interpretation that the Administrator is required to bring an action in all cases other than those where consumer-purchasers are involved. In fact, certification was made to the Administrator in order that, if he saw fit, he could contest such construction. Further study of the provisions of the Act convinces me that any remedy which exists against the defendants herein must under subdivision (e) of section 205 be pursued by the Administrator and cannot lie availed of by plaintiff, who is not a consumer-purchaser. The motion to dismiss must therefore be granted. Settle order.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Armour & Co. v. Blindman
73 F. Supp. 609 (D. Minnesota, 1947)
Wortman v. Young
190 Misc. 525 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1947)
Tuskegee Homes Co. v. Oswalt
26 So. 2d 865 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1946)
Marrow Manufacturing Corp. v. Eitinger
185 Misc. 900 (New York Supreme Court, 1945)
Provisional Government of French Republic v. Cabot
59 F. Supp. 855 (S.D. New York, 1945)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
181 Misc. 778, 47 N.Y.S.2d 138, 1944 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1724, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alba-trading-co-v-constants-nysupct-1944.