of the veal, followed with the 'a' and the price per pound charged, but frequently the 'a' more nearly resembled the small letter 'c', and in some such instances the agents, despite a difference in price of the veal sold, have determined that the supposed 'c' represented the grade of the veal. An examination of all the sales records will show that the 'a' in the shape of 'c' was repeated after March 31, 1945 and that from that date the respondents graded their veal by marking the classification in definite letters above the sale record, thus varying from their prior practice.
Finding that the agents of the Price Administrator had erroneously undertaken to determine the grade of the veal sold, and the overcharge from the grade, the court can only find that the Administrator is only entitled to a judgment of $ 315.09, triple amount of the overcharge established by the proof offered.
It is plain that the overcharge by respondents was in excess of the amount in the judgment, but the excess was not definitely established. The respondents claimed the right to charge above the lawful rate, in their testimony, by reason of their not having received a subsidy, but no definite proof of this amount of overcharge was established. It will be noted that the claim is confined to the overcharge, which is sustained only by partial proof. Had the claim contained an additional charge of failure to grade the meat, and the charge had been sustained by adequate proof, undoubtedly the regulations would have justified a judgment in excess of that which now can be allowed.
The court will find that the overcharge established was in amount of $ 105.03, and that judgment against respondents shall be entered in the amount of $ 315.09, in triple of that sum for a wilful violation of the regulations. Also, despite testimony that respondents had ceased business, an injunction against future violations will be granted as prayed in the complaint.
And now, to wit, October 14, 1946, it is hereby ordered that judgment be entered against Anthony M. Eisert and Simon P. Eisert for the sum of $ 315.09.
And it is further ordered that said Anthony M. Eisert and Simon P. Eisert, their agents, employees, and servants be, and hereby are jointly and severally enjoined from selling, offering for sale or delivering any veal carcass or wholesale cut at a price higher than the maximum price established therefor by RMPR 169, so long as said regulation is in force.
The court, after hearing and consideration, makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law:
Findings of Fact
1. Defendants, Anthony M. Eisert and Simon P. Eisert, partners doing business as Eisert Brothers, in the period commencing September 2, 1944, and ending May 2, 1945, were slaughterers and sellers of beef and veal carcasses at Belle Valley, Erie County, Pennsylvania.
2. The complainant, Paul A. Porter, is Administrator of the Office of Price Administration.
3. In the period commencing on September 2, 1944, and ending May 2, 1945, defendants sold 6,483 1/2 pounds of veal at a total amount in excess of the maximum prices permitted and established by RMPR 169, Section 1364.466 to 1364.469, inclusive, said overcharges amounting to the sum of $ 105.03.
Conclusions of Law
I. Defendants, Anthony M. Eisert and Simon P. Eisert, in the course of trade, wilfully violated the Regulation (RMPR 169, Section 1364.466 to 1364.469, inclusive) permitting and establishing the prices of veal carcasses.
II. Judgment should be entered against Anthony M. Eisert and Simon P. Eisert for the sum of $ 315.03 charged by them in excess of the amounts permitted and established by law for the sale of veal.
III. An injunction should be entered against Anthony M. Eisert and Simon P. Eisert, enjoining and restraining them from selling, offering for sale or delivering veal carcasses or cold cuts at a price higher than the maximum price established therefor by RMPR 169.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.