71 F. Supp. 242 | D.D.C. | 1945
Damages denied.
Petition for injunction granted.
Respondent, in my judgment, has made an honest effort to comply and has seasonably filed, as provided under the statute, Title 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 923(c), a protest on which the petitioner has failed to act “within a reasonable time after it is filed. * * *”
True, the respondent, upon failure of the petitioner to act without undue delay, may still pursue its remedy in the Emergency Court of Appeals, Title 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 923(d), but the fact is the Administrator has done nothing other than file the present bill asking for injunctive' relief and damages.
I find the respondent, despite what might be termed slipshod business practice, has acted in,good faith and made an honest effort to comply, and, as a consequence, should not. be held liable in damages.
On the injunctive aspect of the case it is to be noted, with reference to interpretation of the regulation: “The ultimate criterion [however] is the administrative interpretation, which becomes of controlling weight unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.” Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., 325 U.S. 410, 414, 65 S.Ct. 1215, 1217, 89L.Ed.,1700.
I, therefore, hold that until administrative determination is made of respondent’s protest, Price Chart IV, so-called, is to be deemed valid, in full force and effect, and the respondent enjoined from violation of the same. This does not m any way negative the right of the respondent to proceed immediately in the Emergency Court of Appeals as provided under Title 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 923 (d).
