15 U.S.C. § 715
Purpose of chapter
It is declared to be the policy of Congress to protect interstate and foreign commerce from the diversion and obstruction of, and the burden and harmful effect upon, such commerce caused by contraband oil as herein defined, and to encourage the conservation of deposits of crude oil situated within the United States.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 41
cases, 1935–1987 · leading case: Burford v. Sun Oil Co., 319 U.S. 315 (1943).
Burford v. Sun Oil Co., 319 U.S. 315 (1943). “[9] 15 U.S.C. § 715 , Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan, 293 U.”
United States v. Sharpnack, 355 U.S. 286 (1958). “In contrast, the statute now before us is designed to effectuate a long-standing congressional policy of conformity with local law.”
Glass v. Ickes, 117 F.2d 273 (D.C. Cir. 1940). “33 , 15 U.S.C.A. § 715 (3), permits him to designate an agent to act in his stead.”
Int'l Ass'n of MacHinists & Aerospace Workers v. Org. of Petroleum Exporting Countries, 477 F. Supp. 553 (C.D. Cal. 1979). “30 , 15 U.S.C. § 715 , et seq., was enacted by the Congress to enforce the state statutes, by prohibiting the shipment in interstate commerce of crude oil produced in violation of state laws and regulations.”
Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp. v. Brookside Theatre Corp., 194 F.2d 846 (8th Cir. 1952). “] the condition of the oil industry, the alleged encouragement, cooperation and acquiescence of the Federal Petroleum Ad-""* ministration in the buying progranEs and the like were properly excluded, insofar as they bore on the nature of the restraint and the purpose or end…”
Elec. Bond & Share Co. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 92 F.2d 580 (2d Cir. 1937). “Ohio, supra, or in the oil regulated by the Connally Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 715 et seq. Griswold v. President, etc.”
United States v. Stark, 131 F. Supp. 190 (D. Maryland 1955). “After the 1934 amendment, however, the Court sustained an indictment charging the defendants with willfully falsifying reports required to be filed under the ‘Hot-Oil’ Act of February 22,1935, 15 U.S.C.A. § 715 et seq. The Court stated that the purpose of the 1934 amendment was…”
Stand. Oil Co. of Texas & Pasotex Pipe Line Co. v. United States, 307 F.2d 120 (5th Cir. 1962). “15 U.S.C.A. § 715 et seq. 2 . 15 U.S.C.A.”
United States v. Powers, 307 U.S. 214 (1939). “The indictment, filed September 17, 1938, charges ap-pellees with violations of the Connally (Hot Oil) Act of February 22, 1935, as amended, 15 U. S. C. § 715 et seq., and with conspiracy to violate such Act, 18 U.”
United States v. Levin, 133 F. Supp. 88 (D. Colo. 1953). “15 U.S.C.A. § 715 et seq. The indictment was upheld as setting forth a violation of that portion of the statute which is now Section 1001.”
Deep South Oil Co. of Texas v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 247 F.2d 882 (5th Cir. 1957). “Indeed, so well recognized was such state policy that, in the setting of those days, it led to the passage of the Connally Hot Oil Act, 10 15 U.S.C.A. § 715 et seq. This Act gears interstate transportation of oil to *894 state regulation.”
Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Crude Oil Corp. of Am., 93 F.2d 844 (7th Cir. 1937). “In each of these statutes, as in the registration provisions of this Act, it was held, Congress conditioned particular uses of the channels of interstate commerce upon certain safeguards to prevent those uses from being made the instruments of causing evil or harm in a state…”
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.