Legal Opinion · Dissent

Cogswell v. Aiken

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided August 6, 1951No. Nos. 1078, 1079Published

1DissentHood, Associate Judge

I think these appeals should be dismissed because I do not believe the Administrator is entitled to maintain them. Section 10(c) of the rent act provides: “The Administrator may intervene in any suit or action •wherein a party relies for ground of relief or defense upon this Act or any regulation, order, or requirement thereunder.”1 The act creating this court permits appeals by “Any party aggrieved by any final order or judgment”.2 The question is whether the Administrator is a party aggrieved by the judgments below to the extent that he is enabled to maintain independent appeals.

An…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Fishgold v. Sullivan Drydock & Repair Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Securities & Exchange Commission v. United States Realty & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
  3. Interstate Commerce Commission v. Oregon-Washington Railroad & NavigationSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  4. Wolpe v. PoretskyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1944
  5. Simms v. AndrewsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1941

13 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