Legal Document

329 U.S. 531 67 Supreme Court Reporter 463 91 L.Ed. 479 PARKER et al.v.FLEMING. Number 80. Argued Dec. 18, 1946. Decided Jan. 20, 1947. Judicial review of price administrator's general regulations and orders issued under Emergency Price Control Act were intended by congress to be limited relatively few the Millions people who would affected thereby, avoid delay difficulty in administering act with efficiency expedition deemed necessary accomplish broad purpose act. 1942, §§ 203(a), 204(a, b), 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, 923(a), 924(a, b). Whether person is 'subject' order administrator § as entitled make protest upon which judicial may had, depends some extent whether immediately, substantially adversely affects such person, well requires or prohibits action him. U.S.C.A.Appendix 923(a). Apartment house tenants Administrator directing issuance certificate authorizing eviction proceedings, hence so could not gave vested right remain possession. 2, 4(a), 902, 904(a), The was part prevent excessive rents public interest, anti-eviction promulgated pursuant specifically designed manipulative renting practices result rents. 2(d) amended 902(d). Mr.Alexander Pfeiffer, New York City, for petitioners, Mr. Carl Atlantic Auerbach, Washington, D.C., respondent. Justice BLACK delivered opinion Court. 1 Petitioners are a apartment house. Their landlords applied from Area Rent Director proceedings State courts.1 Section 6 Regulations authority 2 Act, 56 Statutes-at-Large 23, 58 632, U.S.C.App. Supp. V, United States Code Annotated KF65 U5 Appendix, landords instituting except certain specific conditions here relevant,2 when special his finding, example, that failure authorize impose 'substantial hardship' landlords.3 In this case refused issue requested after extensive hearings at both presented evidence. Denial based on finding had wholly failed meet re ulation's conditions; their request concerted plan evade Act; fraud been perpetrated against OPA. Regional affirmed ruling. On landlords, reversed ruling ordered issued. thereupon filed own Administrator. When dismissed protest, they sought relief Appeals, complaining Administrator's 'not accordance law' 'arbitrary capricious.' motion Administrator, ground petitioners 'subject to' therefore no have dismissal protest. Parker versus Porter, 154 Federal Reporter, 2nd Series 830.4 We granted certiorari because importance raised. 328 828, 66 1024. 3 204(a) 924(a), provides 'Any aggrieved denial * protest' an may, complaint secure 'protest.' Under 204(b) can enjoin set aside protested 'order' whole only if it satisfied 'Is law, arbitrary But denies 'protest' all but persons Subject any provision order.' Appeals did question 'aggrieved,' within meaning landlord institute legal evict them apartments. See Communications Commission Sanders Bros. Radio Station, 309 470, 476, 477, 60 693, 698, 84 869. Review denied solely 203(a). 4 deciding concerning granting exception one regulations, we mindful legislative history strongly indicates Congress millions more less them. provide great mass consumers apprehension might cause its purpose.5 Only categories whom whose protests, reviewed these consequences, permitted affecting judicially reviewed.6 courts adhered congressional policy. e.g. Yakus States, 321 414, 64 660, 88 834; Bowles Willingham, 503, 641, 892. 5 Procedural Regulation Office Administration, 7 Fed.Reg. 971, defined regulation order, obtain it, 'prohibits him.' sustained contained definition. Buka Coal company Brown, 133 949, 952. other situations directly involving price-fixing words construed broadly Appeals. Revised 1, Register 8961, agricultural producers subsidy mechanisms control program, stating producer 'shall considered subject maximum regulation.' And Illinois Packing Snyder, 151 337, held meat packers, Defense Supplies Corporation same Administration based, regulations. there said that: 'If anybody regulation, complainant certainly requirement, since claims excluded discriminatory unlawful condition inserted Amendment 2. Since section 204(d) confers court 'jurisdiction determine validity 2,' inadmissible put phrase 'any provision's interpretation impossible anyone invoke our jurisdiction type case, especially who, like complainant, most immediately prejudiced challenged supra, pages 338-339. Thus appears determined dependent him, standards think order. 8 'vested right' possession decisive review. However be, prohibited evicting unless certificate. interest,7 very rents.8 Those valid Taylor 137 654, 662, 663, challenged. If cannot can; challenge effectively all. 9 say about evicted apartments account it. persuaded required They either move themselves possessions another abode, difficult obtain, undertake defense courts, certificate, barred Act. For reason, seems apparent substantially, 10 This situation altogether different, terms administrative complications impact individual, consumer member wishes attack will require him pay higher prices, even tenant rent. relied thought indicate open widespread challenge, has relevancy here. While scope authorized one, page 339, complaint. 11 Reversed. 12 CHIEF JUSTICE, FRANKFURTER BURTON, dissent. claimed purchasers stock co-operative corporation holding each proprietary lease. 6(a) City Area, 13914, amended, 'no shall removed housing accommodation, *unless:' (1) renew lease; (2) unreasonably access premises; (3) violated obligation tenancy committing nuisance; (4) Subtenants occupy premises time expiration prime tenant's (5) 'has immediate compelling necessity recover use occupancy dwelling himself.' 6(b)(3) 'applies accommodations structure owned purchaser reason ownership virtue lease otherwise.' ii pertinent where organized February 17, 1945, effective date issued, process organization finds substantial hardship *' original respondent Paul functions office assumed Philip baron Fleming, Temporary Controls substituted regard summarized previous decisions 423, 431—433, 439, 441, 666, 667, 670, 671, 674, 675, 834 513, 520—521, 646, 647, 650, 4(a) lists classes punished disobedience provisions ipso facto ' sellers commodities, buyers commodities course business landlords. Among showing promulgate egulations 'Prohibit speculative leasing (including relating recovery possession) judgment equivalent likely rent increases *'. recent cooperative arrangement. 6(b), involved, promulgated, according following, among other, stated reasons: 'In months problem evictions potential connection sale corporations reached serious proportions. houses multiple-unit being sold corporations. These turn sell entitles 'proprietary lease' unit structure. seeling cooperative, usually first approached. heavy oressure purchase alternative favor ultimate stock. purchased tenant, then obtains seeks personal occupancy. past virtually unknown defense-rental areas. tendency frequent device every indication accelerate. '* During months, shortage become acute, owners begun leases.' Statement Reasons Accompanying 17 Housing Rental Area.

Classification Label: 8