Legal Opinion

Bowles v. Pechersky

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided February 14, 1946No. Civ. A. No. 4145PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GOURLEY, District Judge.

This is a civil action brought by the Administrator of the Office of Price Administration against the defendant, Louis Pechersky, t/a L. Pechersky’s Market, under and pursuant to the provisions of Sections 2, 4, and 205 (a) and (e) of the Emer*643gency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, §§ 902, 904,.925 (a, e).

It was the contention of the plaintiff that the defendant violated Maximum Price Regulation 42,3, and more particularly that the defendant sold Heinz’ Tomato Soup to his retail trade at a price of two cans for 25$, and that under the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hecht Co. v. BowlesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
  2. Zimberg v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1944
  3. Brown v. Hecht Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1943
  4. Bowles v. American Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1943
  5. Bowles v. AmmonDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1945

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Mercado v. BrannanCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1949
  2. Barnes v. Wheeler, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1947
  3. Connor v. WheelerDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1948
  4. Pueblo v. López LugoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1947
  5. Porter v. JorgensenDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1946

2 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