FRYE & CO. v. VIERHUS

Nos. 561, 562, 565-568.

12 F.Supp. 597 (1935)

FRYE & CO. v. VIERHUS and five other cases.

District Court, W. D. Washington, S. D.

November 2, 1935.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Eggerman & Rosling, of Seattle, Wash., for plaintiff Frye & Co.

K. I. Ghormley, of Seattle, Wash., for complainant Albers Bros. Milling Co.

Almon Ray Smith and Charles E. Congleton, both of Seattle, Wash., for plaintiff James Henry Packing Co.

Venables, Graham & Howe, of Seattle, Wash., for complainant Fisher Flour Mills Co.

Shorts & Hartson, of Seattle, Wash., for complainants Centennial Flouring Mills Co. and Ritzville Flouring Mills.

J. Charles Dennis, U. S. Atty., of Seattle, Wash., Owen P. Hughes, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Tacoma, Wash., and Thomas R. Winter, Sp. Atty., Bureau of Internal Revenue, of Seattle, Wash., for defendant Vierhus.


CUSHMAN, District Judge (after stating the facts as above).

In Fisher Flouring Mills Co. v. Vierhus, 78 F.2d 889, decided by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on August 15, 1935, it was held that the allegation that the Agricultural Adjustment Act was unconstitutional did not remove the cases there involved from the purview of section 3224 of the Revised Statutes (title 26 USCA § 154), which section provides...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases