Mt. Morris Distributing Corp. v. Doran

S.D. New York

Mt. Morris Distributing Corp. v. Doran

36 F.2d 489, 1929 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1716

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York

DecidedJune 19, 1929

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 36 F.2d 489 (Mt. Morris Distributing Corp. v. Doran) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mt. Morris Distributing Corp. v. Doran, 36 F.2d 489, 1929 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1716 (S.D.N.Y. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

KNOX, District Judge.

The within petition is denied on the ground that there is no showing that the Prohibition Administrator has violated the injunction order of Judge Thaeher. As was held in Olivett Distributing Co. v. Bowers (D. C.) 14 F.(2d) 318, the continuance in force of a basic permit does not carry with it an absolute right to the withdrawals specified therein. The issuance of withdrawal permits is within the discretion, to be exercised in good faith, of course, of the Administrator. From all that is before me, I am not satisfied that such discretion has been abused.

Furthermore, the proper procedure to correct any misconduct in the premises on the part of the Administrator is to review his aetion under section 6 of title 2 of the National Prohibition Act (27 USCA § 16).

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

KNOX, District Judge.

The within petition is denied on the ground that there is no showing that the Prohibition Administrator has violated the injunction order of Judge Thaeher. As was held in Olivett Distributing Co. v. Bowers (D. C.) 14 F.(2d) 318, the continuance in force of a basic permit does not carry with it an absolute right to the withdrawals specified therein. The issuance of withdrawal permits is within the discretion, to be exercised in good faith, of course, of the Administrator. From all that is before me, I am not satisfied that such discretion has been abused.

Furthermore, the proper procedure to correct any misconduct in the premises on the part of the Administrator is to review his aetion under section 6 of title 2 of the National Prohibition Act (27 USCA § 16).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 F.2d 489, 1929 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1716, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mt-morris-distributing-corp-v-doran-nysd-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack