Legal Opinion
Patrick Cudahy Family Co. v. Bowles
Emergency Court of Appeals
Decided November 2, 1943No. 55PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MAGRUDER, Judge.
The protest here was against an order denying a landlord’s petition for adjustment of maximum rent, filed under one of the adjustment provisions of an applicable rent regulation. What we said in Armour & Co. v. Brown, Em.App.1943, 137 F.2d 233, 239, is applicable to this case: “A protest against an order denying an application for an adjustment does not open up for review the validity of the regulation itself, but only raises the question whether the Administrator was arbitrary and capricious in concluding that the applicant had failed to make out a case within the terms of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Sheppard v. RosenkransWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- Armour & Co. of Delaware v. BrownEmergency Court of Appeals · 1943
3Cited by9 opinions
- Distillery Rectifying & Wine Workers International Union v. Brown-Forman Distillers Corp.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1948
- Amezaga Balparda v. AgudoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1947
- Ladner v. BowlesEmergency Court of Appeals · 1944
- Wynnewood Park Corp. v. BowlesEmergency Court of Appeals · 1944
- National Labor Relations Board v. Clara-Val Packing Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1951
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.