Legal Opinion
Taub v. Bowles
Emergency Court of Appeals
Decided June 6, 1945No. 188PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LINDLEY, Judge.
Complainants, indicted in the District Court for conspiracy to violate certain reg*819ulations, applied to that court for leave to present to us a complaint objecting to the validity of the regulations. Leave having been granted them to file a complaint “setting forth objections to the validity of” Maximum Price Regulations 193 and 445, they now seek relief in accord with the provisions of Section 204(e) (1) of the Emergency Price Control Act, as amended, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 924(e) (1).
The complaint asserts that federal regulation of prices of intoxicating liquor conflicts with…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Caminetti v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Yakus v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Braverman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Bank of Columbia v. OkelySupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- United States v. RabinowichSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Blumenthal v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- United States v. National City Lines, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 1948
- Dowling Bros. Distilling Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1946
- Collins v. BowlesEmergency Court of Appeals · 1946
- Superior Packing Co. v. ClarkEmergency Court of Appeals · 1947
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.