Bowles v. Alexander
| Decision Date | 30 April 1946 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action No. 4415. |
| Citation | 65 F. Supp. 892 |
| Parties | BOWLES, Administrator, Office of Price Administration, v. ALEXANDER. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania |
Thomas F. Garrahan and Robert B. Greer, both of Pittsburgh, Pa., for plaintiff.
Dunn & Moorhead, of Pittsburgh, Pa. (William G. Gault, of Pittsburgh, Pa., of counsel), for defendant.
This is a civil action brought by the Administrator of the Office of Price Administration against the defendants, R. P. Alexander, Jr., doing business as Alexander Real Estate Company, under and pursuant to the provisions of Section 205(a) of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 901 et seq.
It is the contention of the plaintiff that the defendant violated Section 4(a) of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended by the Stabilization Extension Act of 1944, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 901 et seq., in that the defendant charged rents in excess of the Maximum Rent Regulation (8 Fed.Reg. 14663) as provided for housing accommodations in the Pittsburgh Defense-Rental Area.
It is further contended by the plaintiff that the defendant is the rental agent for housing accommodations situate at 412 Atwood Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, First Floor Left, and 230 Meyran Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, First Floor.
In connection with the housing accommodation situate at 412 Atwood Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, First Floor Left, the defendant as rental agent demanded and received rentals in the amount of $27 per month, from July 1, 1944 to and including May, 1945, while the legal maximum rent on March 1, 1942 was $25 per month for said housing accommodation, or monthly overcharges were made in the amount of $2 for a period of eleven months, or a total overcharge of $22.
In connection with the housing accommodation situate at 230 Meyran Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, First Floor, the defendant as rental agent demanded and received rentals in the amount of $45.50 per month, from July 1, 1944 to and including May, 1945, while the legal maximum rent on March 1, 1942 was $45 per month for said housing accommodation, or monthly overcharges were made in the amount of $2.50 for a period of eleven months, or a total overcharge of $27.50.
The plaintiff claims that the defendant is liable to the Administrator, on behalf of the United States, for the amount of $148.50, the same being three times the amount of the overcharges, pursuant to Section 205(e) of said Act, together with the costs of said proceeding.
The plaintiff also demands injunctive relief against the defendant, his agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons acting directly or indirectly in his behalf, and which violation of the regulations pertaining to Rent Regulation for Housing would be restrained.
The Court, after hearing and consideration, makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law:
Findings Of Fact.
1. The plaintiff is the duly appointed and qualified Administrator of the Office of Price Administration.
2. This action is before the Court pursuant to the provisions of Section 205(a) of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 901 et seq., and jurisdiction is conferred upon this Court by virtue of Section 205(c).
3. Rent Regulation Section 2(b) of the Act (8 Fed.Reg.14663) was in effect for housing in the Pittsburgh Defense-Rental Area during the period from July 1, 1944 to and including May, 1945.
4. That the legal maximum rent for the housing accommodation situate at 412 Atwood Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, First Floor Left, was $25 per month, and that the charge made by the defendant as rental agent for said premises was $2 per month in excess of the legal maximum rent, and that said charge was made for a period of eleven months or a total overcharge of $22.
5. That the legal maximum rent for the housing accommodation situate at 230 Meyran Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, First Floor, was $45 per month, and that the charge made by the defendant as rental agent for said premises was $2.50 per month in excess of the legal maximum rent, and that said charge was made for a period of eleven months or a total overcharge of $27.50.
6. That the facts and circumstances produced at the time of the hearing of the civil action clearly establish that the acts of the defendant were willful and the result of failure to exercise practicable precautions to comply with the Rent Regulation.
Conclusions of Law.
1. The Court has jurisdiction of the within proceeding pursuant to the provisions of Section 205(a) of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 901 et seq.
2. The Court has jurisdiction over the parties hereto by virtue of Section 205(c) of the Act.
3. The defendant, R. P. Alexander, Jr., doing business as Alexander Real Estate Company, has violated the provisions of Section 4(a) of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended by the Stabilization Extension Act of 1944, 50 U.S.C.A. Appendix, § 901 et seq., and, more particularly, Rent Regulation for Housing in the Pittsburgh Defense-Rental Area (8 Fed. Reg. 14663).
4. The defendant as agent demanded and received excess rental for the premises situate at 412 Atwood Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, First Floor Left, in the amount of $2 per month for the period from July 1, 1944 to and including May, 1945, or made a total overcharge of $22 for the rental of said premises.
5. The defendant as agent demanded and received excess rental for the premises situate at 230 Meyran Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, First Floor, in the amount of $2.50 per month for the period from July 1, 1944 to and including May, 1945, or made a total overcharge of $27.50 for the rental of said premises.
6. In the Bill of Complaint, the Government demanded that the defendant be directed to refund to the tenants all rents received in excess of the legal maximum rents after July, 1942 and including June, 1944. However, at the time of trial, the counsel for the Government requested the Court to withdraw the right of recovery for said claim, which was so ordered by the Court.
7. The actions of the defendant in demanding and receiving excess rental for the premises were willful and the result of failure to take practicable precautions.
8. The plaintiff is entitled to recovery and judgment is, therefore, entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant, R. P. Alexander, Jr., doing business as Alexander Real Estate Company, in the amount of $148.50 together with the costs of said proceeding.
9. The plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief as prayed for against the defendant.
Discussion.
In this civil action brought by the Administrator of the Office of Price Administration against the defendant, R. P. Alexander, Jr., doing business as Alexander Real Estate Company, under the provisions of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 901 et seq., it appears that the legal maximum rent for the...
To continue reading
Request your trial