15 U.S.C. § 1267

Injunctions; criminal contempt; trial by court or jury

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Jurisdiction

The United States district courts and the United States courts of the territories shall have jurisdiction, for cause shown and subject to the provisions of rule 65(a) and (b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to restrain violations of this chapter.

(b) Trials

In any proceeding for criminal contempt for violation of an injunction or restraining order issued under this section, which violation also constitutes a violation of this chapter, trial shall be by the court or, upon demand of the accused, by a jury. Such trial shall be conducted in accordance with the practice and procedure applicable in the case of proceedings subject to the provisions of rule 42(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

(Pub. L. 86–613, § 8, July 12, 1960, 74 Stat. 378.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesTransfer of Functions

Functions of Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare under this chapter transferred to Consumer Product Safety Commission, see section 2079 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1978–2020 · leading case: United States v. Articles of Hazardous Substance, 444 F. Supp. 1260 (M.D.N.C. 1978).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Articles of Hazardous Substance, 444 F. Supp. 1260 (M.D.N.C. 1978). · cites it 2× “§ 1264 , under the injunctive procedure of 15 U.S.C. § 1267 , or as it has done here, under the seizure provisions of 15 U.”

A & H Sportswear Co., Inc. v. Victoria's Secret Stores, Inc., 967 F. Supp. 1457 (E.D. Pa. 1997). “2d 615 , (1992) (quoting 15 U.S.C. § 1267 ); See also Intel Corp. v.”

United States v. Shelton Wholesale, Inc., 34 F. Supp. 2d 1147 (W.D. Mo. 1999). “Polonica's testimony at trial that Polaris is not in a position to pay a fine, Tr.”

United States v. Focht, 694 F. Supp. 1199 (W.D. Pa. 1988). “THE LAW ON PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIONS Pursuant to Section 8(a) of the Act, United States district courts have jurisdiction to restrain violations of the Act where cause is shown and Rule 65(a) and (b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are met.”

Messier v. United States Consum. Prod. Saf. Comm'n, 741 F. Supp. 2d 572 (D. Vt. 2010). “Messier next claims that the Court may take jurisdiction under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1267 and 2071 (restraint of violations) and §§ 1264 and 2069 (assessment of civil penalties).”

Jake's Fireworks Inc. v. United States Consum. Prod. Saf. Comm'n (D. Maryland 2020). “at 14 (quoting 15 U.S.C. § 1267 to state that United States district courts have jurisdiction to restrain violations of the FHSA).”

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.