U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1959

Leo O. Johnson, an Individual Doing Business as Johnson Hair and Scalp Clinic v. Federal Trade Commission

Leo O. Johnson, an Individual Doing Business as Johnson Hair and Scalp Clinic v. Federal Trade Commission
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided July 21, 1959 · Rives, Cameron, Jones
266 F.2d 560 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

James I. McCain, New Orleans, La., for petitioner., J. B. Truly, Atty., F.T.C., James E. Corkey, Asst. Gen. Counsel, F.T.C., Earl W. Kintner, General Counsel, Washington, D. C., for respondent.

Leo O. Johnson, an Individual Doing Business as Johnson Hair and Scalp Clinic v. Federal Trade Commission

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

266 F.2d 560

Leo O. JOHNSON, an individual doing business as Johnson Hair and Scalp Clinic, Petitioner,
v.
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Respondent.

No. 17411.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

May 21, 1959.

Rehearing Denied July 21, 1959.

Petition for Review of an Order of the Federal Trade Commission, sitting at Washington, D. C.

James I. McCain, New Orleans, La., for petitioner.

J. B. Truly, Atty., F.T.C., James E. Corkey, Asst. Gen. Counsel, F.T.C., Earl W. Kintner, General Counsel, Washington, D. C., for respondent.

Before RIVES, CAMERON and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

We find no such differences in fact as distinguish this case from Mueller v. United States, 5 Cir., 1958, 262 F.2d 443. We adhere to the doctrines there announced. The order of the Commission is affirmed and will be enforced.

2

Affirmed.

3

CAMERON, Circuit Judge, dissenting.

4

Rehearing denied; CAMERON, Circuit Judge, dissenting.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.