Bowles v. Henry Lustig & Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Per curiam
The defendant is a wholesale dealer in fresh fruits and vegetables in New York City. It satisfies the requirements of the definition of a “purveyor” as that term is defined in M.P.R. 426 and section 3 of Revised Order G-l. Section 5(b) of this Order provides that “any person who meets the requirement of section 3 hereof may apply in writing to the Office of Price Administration” in New York *237City “for recognition as a [purveyor’ and permission to take the markups established herein.” Without having formally applied for such recognition and permission the defendant made sales to institutional…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hecht Co. v. BowlesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Bowles v. SacherCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944