Bowles v. Barclay Corp.

E.D. Pennsylvania

Bowles v. Barclay Corp.

57 F. Supp. 159, 1944 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1892

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

DecidedAugust 22, 1944

DocketNo. 3837

StatusPublished

This text of 57 F. Supp. 159 (Bowles v. Barclay Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bowles v. Barclay Corp., 57 F. Supp. 159, 1944 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1892 (E.D. Pa. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

KALODNER, District Judge.

This is an action for an injunction brought by the Administrator of the Office of Price Administration under Sec. 205(a) of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 925(a). The plaintiff seeks to enjoin acts and practices of the defendants constituting violations of Sec. 4(a) of said Act, of General Order No. 50, “Filing of Prices by Restaurants and Similar Establishments” (8 FR 4808), as amended, and Restaurant Maximum Price Regulation No. 2-1, “Food and Drink Sold for Immediate Consumption” (8 FR 10436), as amended, and any other Regulation issued by the Office of Price Administration, pursuant to the Act, establishing maximum prices for food and drink sold for immediate consumption.

The parties have stipulated that this action may be submitted for Final Decree upon the pleadings and oral evidence of the parties and their witnesses at the hearing held July 26, 1944.

The evidence has clearly established the violations complained of by the plaintiff as set forth in plaintiff’s Requests for Findings of Fact.

I find the facts as stated in plaintiff’s Requests for Findings of Fact. I state the conclusions of law as stated in the plaintiff’s Requests for Conclusions of Law.

An injunction may issue.

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

KALODNER, District Judge.

This is an action for an injunction brought by the Administrator of the Office of Price Administration under Sec. 205(a) of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 925(a). The plaintiff seeks to enjoin acts and practices of the defendants constituting violations of Sec. 4(a) of said Act, of General Order No. 50, “Filing of Prices by Restaurants and Similar Establishments” (8 FR 4808), as amended, and Restaurant Maximum Price Regulation No. 2-1, “Food and Drink Sold for Immediate Consumption” (8 FR 10436), as amended, and any other Regulation issued by the Office of Price Administration, pursuant to the Act, establishing maximum prices for food and drink sold for immediate consumption.

The parties have stipulated that this action may be submitted for Final Decree upon the pleadings and oral evidence of the parties and their witnesses at the hearing held July 26, 1944.

The evidence has clearly established the violations complained of by the plaintiff as set forth in plaintiff’s Requests for Findings of Fact.

I find the facts as stated in plaintiff’s Requests for Findings of Fact. I state the conclusions of law as stated in the plaintiff’s Requests for Conclusions of Law.

An injunction may issue.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 F. Supp. 159, 1944 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bowles-v-barclay-corp-paed-1944.