United States v. Odessa Union Warehouse Co-Op Cecil A. Schell Edward Sewall Marvin Kleyn

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the district court has 27 broad power to “fashion a remedy depending upon the necessities of the particular case”
• noting that a court’s function in deciding whether to issue an injunction authorized by statute to enforce and implement congressional policy is different than when weighing claims of two private litigants
• remanding a preliminary injunction appeal so district court could exercise its discretion under the correct legal standard
• remanding a preliminary injunction appeal so district court could exercise its discretion under the correct legal standard
• addressing 21 U.S.C. § 332(a) and 19 holding that “[w]here an injunction is authorized by statute, and the statutory conditions 20 are satisfied . . . , the agency to whom the enforcement of the right has been entrusted is 21 not required to show irreparable injury”
• in enforcement action by U.S. for violations of Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, public interest should be considered

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).