Minter v. Federal Trade Commission
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
CLARK, Circuit Judge.
This case seems to us a futile continuation of earlier litigation. The trade practices of these petitioners have already been expressly condemned in a unanimous opinion of the United States Supreme Court, Federal Trade Commission v. Keppel & Bro., 291 U.S. 304, 54 S.Ct. 423, 78 L.Ed. 814, February 5, 1934. As the high court there adopted, or rather amplified, the view of the then minority of this court, we can be supposed to be thoroughly familiar with the holding.
The particular practice whose ceasing and desisting was there and here ordered is known in the marts of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Federal Trade Commission v. Standard Education SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Federal Trade Commission v. Algoma Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Federal Trade Commission v. R. F. Keppel & Bro. Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Chicago Silk Co. v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1937
- Jones v. Smith Oil & Refining Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1938
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Commonwealth v. DeCotisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1939
- Hershey Chocolate Corporation v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
- Wolf v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1943
- Pep Boys-Manny, Moe & Jack, Inc. v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.