Bowles v. Luster
District Court, S.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
J. F. T. O’CONNOR, District Judge.
This cause came on regularly for trial on October 19,, 1944, and the Court having heard the evidence and the matter having been submitted for decision by the Court, the Court finds the facts and states the conclusions of law as follows:
Findings of Fact
1. That defendants, M. R. Luster and A. M. Luster, individually and as copartners, doing business as Sunbeam Furniture Sales Company, have violated Section 4(a) of the *992Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, Pub. L. 421, 77th Cong., 2d Sess., 56 Stat. 23, as amended, Sec. 101 of Stabilization Extension Act of 1944,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hecht Co. v. BowlesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Walling v. Helmerich & Payne, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Bowles v. HuffCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1944
- Bowles v. Town Hall Grill, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1944
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bowles v. LeitholdCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1945