FTC v. American Tobacco Co.Annotate this Case
274 U.S. 543 (1927)
U.S. Supreme Court
FTC v. American Tobacco Co., 274 U.S. 543 (1927)
FTC v. American Tobacco Company
Argued April 19, 20, 1927
Decided May 31, 1927
274 U.S. 543
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
A judgment of the circuit court of appeals which turns on a matter of fact of no general importance, depending on an appreciation of circumstance admitting of different interpretations, will not be revised by certiorari. P. 274 U. S. 544.
9 F.2d 570 affirmed.
Certiorari (270 U.S. 638) to a judgment of the circuit court of appeals which set aside an order of the Federal Trade Commission.
MR. JUSTICE McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court.
The statement of the petition for certiorari that the judgment and opinion below might seriously hinder future administration of the law was grave and sufficiently probable to justify issuance of the writ.
Proper decision of the controversy depends upon a question of fact. Did the American Tobacco Company become party to the unlawful combination of tobacco jobbers at Philadelphia to maintain prices? After considering much evidence, the commission gave affirmative answer to that query, but the circuit court of appeals thought there was nothing to support their view. American Tobacco Co. v. Federal Trade Commission, 9 F.2d 570.
It now appears to us that this matter of fact is of no general importance. Accordingly, we adhere to the usual rule of noninterference where conclusions of circuit courts of appeals depend on appreciation of circumstances which admit of different interpretations, and upon that ground alone, we affirm the judgment below.
The opinion of the circuit court of appeals is of uncertain intendment, and is not satisfactory as an exposition of the law. What this Court has said in many opinions indicates clearly enough the general purpose of the statute and the necessity of applying it with strict regard thereto.
Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law 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.