Case Name: VELVO CHEMICAL LABORATORIES, Inc., v. MELLON, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.
Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1926-06-08
Citations: 13 F.2d 1019
Docket Number: No. 2172
Parties: VELVO CHEMICAL LABORATORIES, Inc., v. MELLON, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 13
Pages: 1019–1019

Head Matter:
VELVO CHEMICAL LABORATORIES, Inc., v. MELLON, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.
(District Court, E. D. New York.
June 8, 1926.)
No. 2172.
Rudolf T. Roetschi, of New York City, for plaintiff.
William A. De Groot, U. S. Atty., of Brooklyn, N. Y. (Albert D. Smith, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Brooklyn, N. Y., of counsel), for defendants.

Opinion:
MOSCOWITZ, District Judge.
This is a suit in equity to have the action of the defendant in revoking the permit of the plaintiff to use specially denatured alcohol in the manufacture of hair tonic and certain toilet articles set aside and to reinstate the permit. No evidence was taken on the trial. It was stipulated that this court should base its decision upon the testimony taken before the Commissioner.
The judicial review of these proceedings is a trial de novo (O'Sullivan v. Potter [D. C.] 290 F. 844; Goldberg v. Yellowley [D. C.] 290 F. 389; Hoell v. Mellon [D. C.] 4 F.[2d] 859), and as such the sufficiency of the citation cannot arise (Goldberg v. Yellowley, supra; Schnitzler v. Yellowley [D. C.] 290 F. 849). But I have concluded that the citation is sufficient. The Commissioner has exercised a judicial discretion and I do not find an abuse thereof. I am fully in accord with the conclusion reached by him.
Judgment is therefore granted to the defendant against the plaintiff, dismissing the plaintiff's complaint, with costs.