Legal Opinion

Bowles v. Stitzinger

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided January 23, 1945No. Civil Action 2939PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SCHOONMAKER, District Judge.

This is an action in which plaintiff seeks to recover treble damages pursuant to Section 205(e) of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, 56 Stat. 23, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, §§ 901 et seq., 925 (e), 56 Stat. 765, 50 U.S.A.Appendix, § 961 et seq., which is hereinafter referred to as “the Act.”

Defendant E. L. Stitzinger, Jr., has filed an answer in which he states that he was inducted into the United States Army on May 7, 1944, and therefore avails himself of whatever protection the Soldiers’ & Sailors’ Relief Act of 1940, 50 U.S.C.A, Appendix, § 501 et…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Boyd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. United States v. DarbySupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  3. Wilson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  4. United States v. MacIntoshSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  5. Fleming v. Montgomery Ward & Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1940

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Davis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. United States v. ShapiroCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
  3. Bowles v. MisleDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1946
  4. United States v. KempeDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1945
  5. Freeman v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1947

5 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