New Standard Pub. Co. v. Federal Trade Commission, No. 6319.
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | PARKER, , and SOPER and DOBIE, Circuit |
| Citation | 194 F.2d 181 |
| Parties | NEW STANDARD PUB. CO., Inc. et al. v. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION. |
| Decision Date | 09 February 1952 |
| Docket Number | No. 6319. |
194 F.2d 181 (1952)
NEW STANDARD PUB. CO., Inc. et al.
v.
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION.
No. 6319.
United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.
Argued January 4, 1952.
Decided February 9, 1952.
Henry Ward Beer, New York City (Eli J. Blair, New York City, on brief) for petitioners.
Alan B. Hobbes, Atty., and W. T. Kelley, General Counsel, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, D. C. (James W. Cassedy, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and John W. Carter, Jr., Atty., Federal Trade Commission, Washington, D. C., on brief) for respondent.
Before PARKER, Chief Judge, and SOPER and DOBIE, Circuit Judges.
PARKER, Chief Judge.
This is a petition to review and set aside a cease and desist order of the Federal Trade Commission. Petitioners are the New Standard Publishing Company, a corporation of Richmond, Virginia, engaged in selling books, and J. B. Lewis, who with his wife owns all the stock of the corporation and carries on its business. They were charged with Doubleday-Doran & Company of having engaged in unfair and deceptive
The proceeding against petitioners was originated by complaints filed with the commission in the year 1939 and an attorney examiner of the commission visited petitioners' place of business in May of that year. Sometime before that the corporate petitioner had become the distributor of an encyclopedia published by Doubleday-Doran and the complaints originated from sales methods used in selling that publication. In February 1941 two attorney examiners of the commission came to petitioners' place of business and asked to go through the petitioners' files, stating that the commission had the right to examine them and if permission to do so were denied, the attorneys would take the matter into court and obtain an order requiring that they be produced. Petitioners thereupon allowed the attorneys to proceed with the examination; and the attorneys obtained from the files letters which were subsequently offered in evidence before the commission and information which led to the procurement of witnesses who gave testimony against petitioners. The commission issued its formal complaint in 1942, and petitioners, both before the trial examiner and before the commission itself, moved to suppress this evidence and to dismiss the proceedings on the ground that the evidence had been unlawfully obtained. The commission denied these motions over the vigorous dissent of one of its members.
At the argument in this court, petitioners filed a motion that the court declare...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sellers v. Regents of University of California, No. 23581.
...not proper. Congress of Racial Equality v. Douglas, 318 F.2d 95 (5th Cir. 1963); New Standard Publishing Co. v. Federal Trade Commission, 194 F.2d 181 (4th Cir. 1952). Moreover, the prime prerequisite of injunctive relief, the threat of irreparable future harm that might be caused by enforc......
-
Menendez v. Saks and Company, No. 872
...and does not intend to do," Negron v. Wallace, 436 F.2d 1139, 1145 (2d Cir. 1971) (quoting from New Standard Publishing Co. v. FTC, 194 F.2d 181, 183 (4th Cir. 1952)).23 Here Judge Bryan found that the last shipment by the interventors of cigars bearing the owners' trademarks was made in Fe......
-
Standard Brands, Inc. v. Zumpe, Civ. A. No. 66-769.
...F.2d 414 (4th Cir. 1940); Aerated Products Co. v. Department of Health, 159 F.2d 851 (3rd Cir. 1947); New Standard Pub. Co., Inc. v. FTC, 194 F.2d 181 (4th Cir. 28 See Ellis, Trade Secrets, §§ 85 and 86. See also Seismograph Service Corp. v. Offshore Raydist, 135 F.Supp. 342 (E.D.La.1955), ......
-
Cortright v. Resor, No. 1051
...a court of equity will not enjoin one from doing what he is not attempting and does not intend to do." New Standard Publishing Co. v. FTC, 194 F.2d 181, 183 (4 Cir. As stated at the outset, we are far from holding that under no circumstances could a civilian court interfere 447 F.2d 255 wit......
-
Sellers v. Regents of University of California, No. 23581.
...not proper. Congress of Racial Equality v. Douglas, 318 F.2d 95 (5th Cir. 1963); New Standard Publishing Co. v. Federal Trade Commission, 194 F.2d 181 (4th Cir. 1952). Moreover, the prime prerequisite of injunctive relief, the threat of irreparable future harm that might be caused by enforc......
-
Menendez v. Saks and Company, No. 872
...and does not intend to do," Negron v. Wallace, 436 F.2d 1139, 1145 (2d Cir. 1971) (quoting from New Standard Publishing Co. v. FTC, 194 F.2d 181, 183 (4th Cir. 1952)).23 Here Judge Bryan found that the last shipment by the interventors of cigars bearing the owners' trademarks was made in Fe......
-
Standard Brands, Inc. v. Zumpe, Civ. A. No. 66-769.
...F.2d 414 (4th Cir. 1940); Aerated Products Co. v. Department of Health, 159 F.2d 851 (3rd Cir. 1947); New Standard Pub. Co., Inc. v. FTC, 194 F.2d 181 (4th Cir. 28 See Ellis, Trade Secrets, §§ 85 and 86. See also Seismograph Service Corp. v. Offshore Raydist, 135 F.Supp. 342 (E.D.La.1955), ......
-
Cortright v. Resor, No. 1051
...a court of equity will not enjoin one from doing what he is not attempting and does not intend to do." New Standard Publishing Co. v. FTC, 194 F.2d 181, 183 (4 Cir. As stated at the outset, we are far from holding that under no circumstances could a civilian court interfere 447 F.2d 255 wit......