Legal Opinion
Dorsey v. Martin
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 18, 1945No. 3797PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KALODNER, District Judge.
This suit was brought to recover damages, counsel fees and costs under Section 205(e) of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, 56 Stat. 33, 50 U.S.C.A. Appendix 925(e).
Defendant has moved to dismiss on the ground that the complaint fails to state a cause of action because defendant leased the property as “agent” and because the damages, described by defendant as the “cumulative penalty,” sought in the complaint are not in accord with Section 205(e) of the Emergency Price Control Act.
Plaintiffs have alleged that they rented the premises of 644-46 North 40th Street,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Huntington v. AttrillSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Everly v. ZeppDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1944
- Horan v. HughesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1903
- Seyfert v. BeanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877
- Sloan Corp. v. LintonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Sanders v. MetzgerDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1946
- Banks v. Chas. Kurz Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1946
- Tabor v. FordMissouri Court of Appeals · 1951
- Mayer v. BuchananDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1946
- Denison v. TockerNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1951
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.