Bowles v. Lentin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

17 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “FINDINGS OF FACT. * * * Julian Lentin, on clivers dates from October 20, 1943 to the date of the filing of the complaint in this cause has purchased and sold lumber at prices in excess of the maximum prices established therefor under Maximum Price Regulation No. 94, as amended and Maximum Price Regulation No. 458 as amended and the sales made by him were not made to purchasers for use or consumption other than in the course of trade or business, said sales having been made to retailers or wholesalers. 4. That the aforesaid sales and purchases by defendant, Julian Lentin, at prices in excess of such maximum prices were knowingly and willfully made by him and were known by him at the time to be in violation of the applicable regulations. 5. That the testimony of Julian Lentin in the cause with respect to his purchases and sales of lumber and otherwise was false in material respects. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW * * * $ * ❖ . That the purchases and sales of lumber by defendant, Julian Lentin, in excess of the applicable maximum prices therefor referred to in the above Findings of Fact constitute violations of the above mentioned regulations as amended and of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942 as amended.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Lentin v. Commissioner

2. “* * * Administrator cannot be bound by oral interpretations of his employees which are contrary to official published regulations.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Goodman v. Benson