Arthur N. Economou and Arthur N. Economou & Co., Inc. v. United States Department of Agriculture

Second Circuit

Arthur N. Economou and Arthur N. Economou & Co., Inc. v. United States Department of Agriculture

494 F.2d 519, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 9431

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMarch 28, 1974

Docket759

StatusPublished

This text of 494 F.2d 519 (Arthur N. Economou and Arthur N. Economou & Co., Inc. v. United States Department of Agriculture) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arthur N. Economou and Arthur N. Economou & Co., Inc. v. United States Department of Agriculture, 494 F.2d 519, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 9431 (2d Cir. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

494 F.2d 519

Arthur N. ECONOMOU and Arthur N. Economou & Co., Inc., Petitioners,
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Respondent.

No. 759, Docket 73-1221.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued March 28, 1974.
Decided March 28, 1974.

Arthur N. Economou, petitioner pro se.

Jackson & Kupperman, Brooklyn N.Y., on the brief for petitioner Corp.

Irving Jaffe, Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., Civil Div., Dept. of Justice (Morton Hollander and Michael H. Stein, Attys., Civil Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., of counsel), on the brief for respondent.

Before KAUFMAN, Chief Judge, and SMITH and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Petitioners, who are no longer in business as futures commission merchants under the Commodity Exchange Act seek review of a 90-day suspension order, advancing numerous grounds, including estoppel, lack of evidence of violation and of willfulness. We need not address most of these, since it appears that the essential finding of willfulness, now passionately protested, was made in a proceeding instituted without the customary warning letter, which the Judicial Officer conceded might well have resulted in prompt correction of the claimed insufficiencies. Under these circumstances, the finding of willfulness appears erroneous on the record taken as a whole, and the sanctions imposed unwarranted.

The petition for review is granted and the order set aside.

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

494 F.2d 519

Arthur N. ECONOMOU and Arthur N. Economou & Co., Inc., Petitioners,
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Respondent.

No. 759, Docket 73-1221.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued March 28, 1974.
Decided March 28, 1974.

Arthur N. Economou, petitioner pro se.

Jackson & Kupperman, Brooklyn N.Y., on the brief for petitioner Corp.

Irving Jaffe, Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., Civil Div., Dept. of Justice (Morton Hollander and Michael H. Stein, Attys., Civil Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., of counsel), on the brief for respondent.

Before KAUFMAN, Chief Judge, and SMITH and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Petitioners, who are no longer in business as futures commission merchants under the Commodity Exchange Act seek review of a 90-day suspension order, advancing numerous grounds, including estoppel, lack of evidence of violation and of willfulness. We need not address most of these, since it appears that the essential finding of willfulness, now passionately protested, was made in a proceeding instituted without the customary warning letter, which the Judicial Officer conceded might well have resulted in prompt correction of the claimed insufficiencies. Under these circumstances, the finding of willfulness appears erroneous on the record taken as a whole, and the sanctions imposed unwarranted.

The petition for review is granted and the order set aside.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

494 F.2d 519, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 9431, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arthur-n-economou-and-arthur-n-economou-co-inc-v-united-states-ca2-1974.