15 U.S.C. § 57
Separability clause
If any provision of this subchapter, or the application thereof to any person, partnership, or corporation, or circumstance, is held invalid, the remainder of this subchapter, and the application of such provisions to any other person, partnership, corporation, or circumstance, shall not be affected thereby.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19
cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1976–2024 · leading case: Ass'n of Nat'l Advertisers, Inc. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 627 F.2d 1151 (D.C. Cir. 1980).
Ass'n of Nat'l Advertisers, Inc. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 627 F.2d 1151 (D.C. Cir. 1980). “15 U.S.C. § 57 (e)(3)(A). The Commission’s contention in this respect, which seeks to answer attacks upon the “rule” that the Commission promulgated, in addition to being contrary to the language of the statute, is also contrary to the statements of Senator Moss and…”
Good v. Altria Grp., Inc., 501 F.3d 29 (1st Cir. 2007). “15 U.S.C. §§ 57 (c)-(e). Indeed, courts and commentators have understood these additional safeguards to reflect a *52 congressional concern — well-documented in their legislative history — over the preemptive effect of FTC regulation on state consumer protection law.”
Virden v. Altria Grp., Inc., 304 F. Supp. 2d 832 (N.D.W. Va. 2004). “A unanimous panel concluded that this portion of the injunction could not stand because “that would enshrine the current FTC system as the sole legitimate testing method, even though it was not passed pursuant to section 18 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 57 (a) (1982), and not…”
In re Santa Fe Nat. Tobacco Co. Mktg. & Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig., 288 F. Supp. 3d 1087 (D.N.M. 2017). “15 U.S.C. §§ 57 (c)-(e)." Good v. Altria Grp.”
Fed. Trade Comm'n v. IFC Credit Corp., 543 F. Supp. 2d 925 (N.D. Ill. 2008). “15 U.S.C. § 57 (a). The addition was significant, for the phrase, “affecting commerce,” indicates Congress’ intent to regulate to the outer limits of its authority under the Commerce Clause.”
Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Publishers Bus. Servs., Inc., 821 F. Supp. 2d 1205 (D. Nev. 2010). “2d at 605 (citing 15 U.S.C. § 57 (b)). Additionally, “[n]o action may be brought by the Commission under this section more than 3 years after the rule violation .”
Canadian Pac. Enter. (U.S.) Inc. v. Krouse, 506 F. Supp. 1192 (S.D. Ohio 1981). “2183, which imposes special rulemaking procedures, 15 U.S.C. § 57 (a), that are somewhat contradictory, American Optometric Association, 626 F.”
Jackson v. Wood, 859 P.2d 378 (Idaho Ct. App. 1993). “The Woods’ argument, however, does not address the requirement that violations as to octane disclosure must be vindicated in an action brought by the Federal Trade Commission, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 57 (b), or that an individual action by the franchisee to recover damages for…”
Nat'l Auto. Dealers Ass'n v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 421 F. Supp. 31 (M.D. La. 1976). “Section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 57 a(a)(l)(B), is the Commission’s new authority for promulgating regulatory rules.”
Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Credit Bureau Ctr., LLC (N.D. Ill. 2021). “The FTC asks that the Court reimpose the prior judgment pursuant to section 19 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 57 (b). CBC opposes the FTC's motion and has filed a countermotion to "enforce" the Seventh Circuit's mandate, which it reads as precluding the relief the FTC seeks.”
Hayes v. First Com. Corp., 763 So. 2d 733 (La. Ct. App. 2000). “FNBC argued that banking activities are regulated by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 57 (a)(f). FNBC also argued that the exception of vagueness be granted because the petition fails to set forth the specific statute Hayes alleges was…”
Hubbard v. Trussville Gas (N.D. Ala. 2023). “§ 13 (pertaining to punishment for violations of the Commodity Exchange Act); 15 U.S.C. § 57 (separability clause of the Fair Trade Commission Act).”
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.