BEEMAN ET AL.

v.

MICHIGAN BOARD OF PHARMACY ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Kunz v. New York, 340 U.S. 290 (U.S. 1951)
  …cal means of controlling meetings in its parks. This Court, as presently constituted, only last Term dismissed an attack on the park permit system “for want of a substantial federal question,” Justices Black and Douglas dissenting. Hass v. New York, 338 U. S. 803. New York also has used the requirement of a permit for assemblages which mask their faces to suppress the Ku Klux Klan, without stopping harmless masquerade balls and the like. Penal Law § 710. The permit system is used in many other situations whe…
• Johnston Seed Co. v. United States, 191 F.2d 228 (10th Cir. 1951)
  ….A. It is enough if they appear in the form of a statement in the report and order of the Commission. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. United States, D.C., 60 F.Supp. 580; Beard-Laney Inc., v. United States, D.C., 83 F.Supp. 27, affirmed 338 U.S. 803, 70 S.Ct. 64, 94 L.Ed. 486. There is no rule of thumb readily available in every case for quick and easy solution of the question whether the basic findings made by the Commission were adequate and sufficient to support a final order granting or d…