Legal Opinion

Weisel & Co. v. Bowles

Emergency Court of Appeals

Decided December 21, 1945No. 256PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LINDLEY, Judge.

Complainant, a producer and manufacturer of sausage, protested Maximum Price Regulation No. 389, Sections 2(c) and 12(c) (2), issued May 5, 1943 and Amendments No. 7 and No. 11, issued August 7, 1943 and February 25, 1944 respectively. (8 F.R. 5903) It asserted arbitrary and capricious discrimination in (1) that it was not permitted to sell sausage f.o.b. point of origin in other than carload lots, whereas sellers of kosher sausage, beef sausage and special pork sausage of type 1 might do so; (2) that though distributors might ship by truck at the point of origin price and add…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Philadelphia Coke Co. v. BowlesEmergency Court of Appeals · 1943
  2. Armour & Co. v. BowlesEmergency Court of Appeals · 1945
  3. Pfeiffer Brewing Co. v. BowlesEmergency Court of Appeals · 1945
  4. Interwoven Stocking Co. v. BowlesEmergency Court of Appeals · 1944
  5. Birtcherd Dairy, Inc. v. BowlesEmergency Court of Appeals · 1945

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Mora v. Superior Court of Puerto RicoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1954
  2. Mora v. Tribunal Superior de Puerto RicoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1954

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API