Legal Opinion

De Milo Perfume Co. v. Campbell

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided July 9, 1928Published

1Opinion of the Court

THACHER, District Judge.

The . charges upon which plaintiff’s permit to use specially denatured alcohol in the manufacture of perfumes was revoked were amply sustained by the evidence. It is, however, contended that the Commissioner of Prohibition was without power to revoke the permit. By virtue of the Act of March 3, 1927, c. 348, 44 Stat. L. 1381 (5 USCA §§ 281-28le), and the executive order of the Acting Secretary of the Treasury, promulgated April 1, 1927, the powers formerly exercised by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, pursuant to section 13 of title 3 of the National Prohibition…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Higgins v. FosterCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926
  2. Remick Products, Inc. v. MillsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1927
  3. Milillo v. CanfieldCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API