Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

United States v. Cincinnati Transit, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Ohio

Decided January 28, 1972No. 8250PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER

PORTER, District Judge.

This is a ease of first impression under the recently enacted Wage and Price Stabilization Act. It has mushroomed as a result of violent disagreement as to whether a service cutback and fare in crease violated Phase I and II Price Freeze Regulations.

We conclude that the fare increase violated Phase II regulations. We conclude that the service cutback, if not a Phase I violation, violated the Phase II regulations, and a prospective injunction should issue against any further such fare increases and/or service cutbacks without the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Public Serv. Comm'n of Utah v. Wycoff Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
  2. Kent v. DullesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  3. American Power & Light Co. v. Securities & Exchange CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  4. A. L. Mechling Barge Lines, Inc. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  5. Unexcelled Chemical Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1953

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Hanes Corporation, a North Carolina Corporation v. Julien MillardCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1976
  2. Howlett v. ScottIllinois Supreme Court · 1977
  3. DeRieux v. Five Smiths, Inc.Temporary Emergency Court of Appeals · 1974
  4. Board of Education v. Department of Health, EducationDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1975
  5. Central Carolina Nissan, Inc. v. SturgisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API