ST. REGIS PAPER CO.
v.
UNITED STATES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Court granted a petition for writ of certiorari limited to specific questions regarding agency investigative processes and forfeiture liability. The Court also granted a motion to toll further accumulation of forfeitures pending disposition of the writ.
Petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to review questions concerning the modification of agency investigative processes, the nature of agency orders,…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Due Process Of Law cases and more on FLexlaw
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit granted limited to Questions 2, 3, 5, and 6 presented by the petition which read as follows:
“2. Does an order and judgment of the District Court under Section 6 (c) of the Administrative Procedure Act, modifying agency investigative process, carry with it liability for forfeitures for noncompliance with the original unmodified agency process?
“3. Did the orders of the Commission, purportedly issued pursuant to Section 6 (b) of the FTC Act, constitute a requirement that petitioner furnish ‘answers in writing to specific questions/ and not a requirement of a ‘special report/ so that the provisions of the third unnumbered paragraph of Section 10 of the FTC Act, providing for forfeitures in the sum of $100 per day for each day of failure to file a ‘report/ have no application?
Horace R. Lamb for petitioner.
Solicitor General Cox, Acting Assistant Attorney General Kirkpatrick and Richard A. Solomon for the United States.
“5. Are petitioner’s retained file copies of confidential reports to the Bureau of Census for the Census of Manufactures subject to the investigative processes of the Commission?
“6. Does the investigative power asserted by the Commission under Section 6 (b) of the FTC Act, if not reviewable except at the risk of paying forfeitures accumulated at the rate of $100 per day throughout the period of noncompliance, including the period of judicial review, deprive petitioner of its property without due process of law?”
Since time will not permit a hearing and determination of these issues until our next Term, petitioner’s motion pursuant to § 10 (d) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 60 Stat. 243, 5U. S. C. (1958 ed.) § 1009 (d), is granted to the extent of tolling, as of the filing of its petition on February 7, 1961, and pending this Court’s disposition of the writ of certiorari, the further running and accumulation of forfeitures under § 10 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 38 Stat. 723, 15 U. S. C. (1958 ed.) § 50. Petitioner’s liability for forfeitures accruing prior to February 7, 1961, is to abide the event of this litigation.