Legal Opinion

James H. Sewell, Doing Business Under the Fictitious Firm Name and Style of Burns Cuboid Company v. Federal Trade Commission

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided October 16, 1956No. 14354_1Published

1Opinion of the Court

240 F.2d 228

James H. SEWELL, doing business under the fictitious firm

name and style of Burns Cuboid Company, Petitioner,

v.

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Respondent.

No. 14354.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

Oct. 16, 1956.

Maury, Larsen & Hunt, George R. Maury, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.

Earl W. Kintner, Gen. Counsel, Robert B. Dawkins, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Alvin L. Berman, Atty., F.T.C., Washington, D.C., for respondent.

Before POPE, FEE and CHAMBERS, Circuit Judges.

CHAMBERS, Circuit Judge.

1

Sewell, petitioner here, and respondent before the Federal Trade Commission, has…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Rochester Telephone Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  2. Gray v. PowellSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  3. Federal Trade Commission v. Standard Education SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  4. Federal Trade Commission v. Algoma Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
  5. Federal Trade Commission v. Pacific States Paper Trade Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1927

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

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

Powered by the Exa API