Economou v. United States Department of Agriculture

Second Circuit

Economou v. United States Department of Agriculture

494 F.2d 519

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMarch 28, 1974

DocketNo. 759, Docket 73-1221

StatusPublished

This text of 494 F.2d 519 (Economou 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

Economou v. United States Department of Agriculture, 494 F.2d 519 (2d Cir. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

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 insuffi-ciencies. 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

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 insuffi-ciencies. 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, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/economou-v-united-states-department-of-agriculture-ca2-1974.