Federal Trade Commission v. Carter Products, Inc.

Supreme Court

Federal Trade Commission v. Carter Products, Inc.

346 U.S. 327, 74 S. Ct. 2, 98 L. Ed. 2d 4, 1953 U.S. LEXIS 2681

Supreme Court of the United States·Decided November 9, 1953·No. 114·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Certiorari is granted and the judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated.' The cause is remanded to the Court of Appeals with directions to reinstate its prior judgment and order after amending it so that it specifically authorizes the Federal Trade Commission to open this proceeding for further evidence and a new order consistent with the Court of Appeals opinion herein. Cf. Reilly v. Pinkus, 338 U. S. 269, 277; Labor Board v. Donnelly Garment Co., 330 U. S. 219, 224-228.

Mr. Justice Douglas dissents. The Chief Justice took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

Per Curiam.

Certiorari is granted and the judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated.' The cause is remanded to the Court of Appeals with directions to reinstate its prior judgment and order after amending it so that it specifically authorizes the Federal Trade Commission to open this proceeding for further evidence and a new order consistent with the Court of Appeals opinion herein. Cf. Reilly v. Pinkus, 338 U. S. 269, 277; Labor Board v. Donnelly Garment Co., 330 U. S. 219, 224-228.

Mr. Justice Douglas dissents. The Chief Justice took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Federal Trade Commission v. Carter Products, Inc., 346 U.S. 327, 74 S. Ct. 2, 98 L. Ed. 2d 4, 1953 U.S. LEXIS 2681 (1953).

Pincite

346 U.S. 327 (Federal Trade Commission v. Carter Products, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Richard A. Williams and Alfred S. Trask v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission, D.C. Transit System, Inc., Intervenor. Democratic Central Committee of the District of Columbia, Leonard N. Bebchick and Daniel W. Gottlieb v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission, D.C. Transit System, Inc., Intervenor. D.C. Transit System, Inc. v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission

415 F.2d 922 (D.C. Circuit, 1969)

Williams v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission

415 F.2d 922 (D.C. Circuit, 1968)

Carter Products, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission

268 F.2d 461 (Ninth Circuit, 1959)

Dolcin Corp. v. Federal Trade Commission

219 F.2d 742 (D.C. Circuit, 1955)

Pennsylvania State Athletic Commission v. Bratton

112 A.2d 422 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1955)

Opinion

Related