The Elmo Division of Drive-X Company, Inc. v. Paul Rand Dixon, the Federal Trade Commission
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
1Per curiam
Appellant sought declaratory and injunctive relief to stop the Federal Trade Commission from continuing with a complaint proceeding on the ground that a consent decree in an earlier proceeding requires the Commission to proceed by way of reopening that case. The District Court dismissed for want of jurisdiction; we must accordingly assume, for the purposes of the appeal, the truth of facts well pleaded. They are essentially the following: that appellant at all relevant times advertised and sold proprietary medicines; that in 1952 the Commission and appellant’s predecessor in interest entered…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Leedom v. KyneSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Vitarelli v. SeatonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- American Federation of Labor v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- St. Regis Paper Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by56 opinions
- City of Rochester v. BondCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1979
- Sterling Drug Inc. v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1971
- A. Ernest Fitzgerald v. Robert E. Hampton, Chairman of United States Civil Service CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1972
- Ralph Nader, Esquire, and Center for Auto Safety, Inc. v. John Volpe, Individually, and as Secretary of the Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1972
- Pepsico, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission, Pepsi-Cola Bottling Company of Corvallis, Inc., Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellant v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1972
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.