16 C.F.R. § 2.8
[Reserved]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1976–2009 · leading case: Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Tarriff, 584 F.3d 1088 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Tarriff, 584 F.3d 1088 (D.C. Cir. 2009). “1 Appellants’ objection to the subpoenas relies solely on the proposition that the rule of the Commission, by mandating that “[investigational] hearings shall be stenographically reported and a transcript thereof shall be made a part of the record of the investigation,” 16…”
Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Hughes, 710 F. Supp. 1520 (N.D. Tex. 1989). “The testimony, taken under oath in the presence of defendant’s counsel, was provided pursuant to 16 C.F.R. § 2.8 and 2.10 (1988). While Hughes did not sign the statement, his testimony was voluntary and under oath in the presence of counsel.”
Stand. Oil Co. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 475 F. Supp. 1261 (N.D. Ind. 1979). “16 C.F.R. § 2.8 . The FTC’s adjudicative powers are more closely circumscribed.”
Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Tarriff, 557 F. Supp. 2d 92 (D.D.C. 2008). “8(b), 16 C.F.R. § 2.8 (b). That section provides: Investigational hearings shall be conducted by any Commission member, examiner, attorney, investigator, or other person duly designated under the FTC Act, for the purpose of hearing the testimony of witnesses and receiving…”
Kunc v. ARA Servs., Inc., 414 F. Supp. 809 (W.D. Okla. 1976). “8 of the FTC rules of practice as then in effect and codified as 16 C.F.R. § 2.8 . The FTC investigation procedures and the FTC Consent Judgment procedures are both set out in Part 2 of the FTC Rules of Practice codified as 16 C.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.