Legal Opinion
United States v. Wissahickon Tool Works, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided July 12, 1949PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KAUFMAN, District Judge.
These are four separate actions brought by the United States, pursuant to § 403(c) of the Renegotiation Act, 50 U.S.C.A. Appendix, § 1191(c), against Wissahickon Tool Works, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as “Wissahickon”), Roxboro Steel Company (hereinafter referred to as “Roxboro”), Wilkes Barre Carriage Co., Inc. (hereinafter referred to ■ as “Wilkes Barre”), and West Pittston Iron Works, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as “West Pittston”), to recover allegedly excessive profits for the fiscal year which ended July 31, 1943.
The complaints allege that defendants are…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Federal Power Commission v. Natural Gas Pipeline Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- United States v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- United States v. ShawSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Lichter v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- George Moore Ice Cream Co. v. RoseSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- United States v. Wissahickon Tool Works, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1952
- United States v. FrankDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1962
- United States v. Ameco Electronic CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1963
- Kearney v. A'HearnDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1962
- United States v. Buffalo Coal Mining CompanyDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1959
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.