TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Woods v. Hills

WOODS, Housing Expediter v. HILLS

Woods v. Hills, 168 F.2d 995 (10th Cir. 1948)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
July 8, 1948
Docket
No. 3497
Judges
Huxman, Murrah, Phillips
Citations
168 F.2d 9951948 U.S. App. LEXIS 2168

Opinion of the Court — Phillips

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PHILLIPS, Circuit Judge.

Chester Bowles, Administrator of the Office of Price Administration, brought this action against Hills for treble damages and for an injunction under § 205 of the Emergency Price Control Act, as amended, 50 U. S.C.A., Appendix, §§ 901, 925, and under the Rent Regulation for Housing, as amended, 8 F.R. 7322 . Hills remodeled apartments located in a defense rental area, subject to the rent regulations, and duly registered them. Thereafter, on December 17, 1943, the maximum rents were reduced by the Area Rent Director, pursuant to § 5(c) of the Regulations, and, on March 7, 1945, the Rent Director issued an order further reducing the maximum rents.

The parties waived trial by jury and stipulated that the only issue was the validity of the second order. The District Court entered judgment for Hills on October 29, 1946, holding that the burden was on the Administrator to establish the validity of the second order, and that he had failed to introduce proof establishing its validity. An appeal to this court followed. We certified three questions to1 the Supreme Court. On May 10, 1948, the Supreme Court handed down an opinion in the certified case. See Woods, Housing Expediter, v. Hills, 68 S.Ct. 992 . It follows from that opinion that the District Court was and is without jurisdiction to determine the validity of the second rent order and that the judgment below must be reversed. However, on remand, the District Court can withhold judgment so that it may give effect to any determination by the Housing Expediter or the Emergency Court of Appeals, should Hills pursue his remedy under the statutory review procedure indicated in the next to the last paragraph of the opinion of the Supreme Court adverted to above.

The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1949: 119492026peak 1949 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Roupp v. Woods176 F.2d 544 (10th Cir. 1949)

Most recent

  1. Roupp v. Woods176 F.2d 544 (10th Cir. 1949)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Woods v. Hills, 334 U.S. 210 (1948) 24

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list