People v. Fish

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that past improper conduct, while suggestive of a likelihood of future improper conduct, does not necessarily denote such, and the court, in making an inference of likelihood, should look at any relevant factors
• holding that Porter authorized disgorgement under the Commodity Exchange Act
• noting that although the CEA does not contain the same explicit grant of broad equitable authority found in the SEA, \neither does [the CEA] have any provision restricting the equitable power of the district court\
• concluding “there is nothing in either the statutory language or legislative history which suggests that intent either to affect market prices or specific intent to exceed the specu- lative limits is a necessary element of a violation” of the predecessor stat- ute to § 6a(e)
• relevant factor requirement is not a device by which parties can thwart enforcement by offering new evidence challenging wisdom of regulation
• “The fact that a violator has continued to maintain that his conduct was blameless has prompted several courts to look favorably on injunctive relief.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).