Case Name: UNITED STATES v. HIRAHARA et al.
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1947-10-31
Citations: 164 F.2d 157
Docket Number: No. 11576
Parties: UNITED STATES v. HIRAHARA et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 164
Pages: 157–158

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES v. HIRAHARA et al.
No. 11576.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Oct. 31, 1947.
Ray J. O’Brien, U. S. Atty., and Maurice Sapienza, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Honolulu, T. H., and Reynold Colvin, Asst. U. S. Atty., of San Francisco, Cal., for appellant.
Clarence Y. Shimamura, of Honolulu, T. H., for appellee Hirahara.
Hyman M. Greenstein, of Honolulu, T. H., for appellee Golding.
Before DENMAN, BONE, and ORR, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This case is before us on appeal from an order dismissing an action brought under § 205(e) of the Emergency Price Control Act, as, amended, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 925(e), to recover treble damages for violation of maximum price regulations on lumber.
The situation in this case is identical with that in Porter v. Koike, No. 11,575, 9 Cir., 164 F.2d 155. There, as here, the substitution of the United States as party plaintiff and a summary reversal are sought. For the reasons stated in our opinion in Porter v. Koike the motion for substitution of the United States as party plaintiff is granted and the order of dismissal, 69 F.Supp. 441, is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings.