Tedrow v. S. T. Lewis & Son Dry Goods Co.
255 U.S. 98 (1921)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Tedrow v. S. T. Lewis & Son Dry Goods Co., 255 U.S. 98 (1921)

Tedrow v. S. T. Lewis & Son Dry Goods Company

No. 357

Argued October 19, 20, 1920

Decided February 28, 1921

255 U.S. 98

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Syllabus

Decided on the authority of United Stales v. Cohen Grocery Co., ante,255 U. S. 81.

Affirmed.

Bill to enjoin institution of criminal prosecutions against dealers in wearing apparel under § 4 of the Food Control Act.

Page 255 U. S. 99

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

Various dealers in wearing apparel in the City of Denver filed their bill to enjoin the United States Attorney from instituting prosecutions against them under § 4 of the Lever Act on the ground that Congress had no power to adopt that section because a state of peace prevailed, or, if a state of war existed, the regulation of the price for which wearing apparel should be sold was beyond the authority of Congress, and for the further reason that the section in question was void for repugnancy to the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution because of its vagueness, want of standard, and denial of the equal protection of the laws. The case was submitted on bill and answer, and the statute was held void because of its uncertainty and want of standard, and its enforcement was enjoined.

That the court was right in this ruling, which is the subject now before us upon direct appeal brought by the government is not open in view of the decision this day in the Cohen Grocery case, ante,255 U. S. 81 and, for the reasons stated in that case, it is affirmed.

Decree affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE PITNEY and MR. JUSTICE BRANDEIS concur in the result.

MR. JUSTICE DAY took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.