Fleming

This is an appeal from a judgment holding appellant’s predecessor Price Administrator Porter not entitled to recover damages in a suit under Section 205(e) of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended by the Stabilization Extension Act of 1944, Public Law 388, 78th Congress, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 925(e), hereinafter called the Act, and dismissing the complaint.

The complaint below alleged that Maximum Price Regulation 164 establishes maximum prices for red cedar shingles where the shipments thereof originate at the mill rather than at a distribution yard; that between October 1, 1943, and February 15, 1944, appellee sold and delivered 3,149 squares of such shingles (a) shipment of which originated at a mill and not at a distribution yard; (b) that none of such purchases by appellee’s customers was made for use or consumption other than in the course of trade or business; that the ap-pellee received a price for each such delivery in excess of the maximum price established by the regulation; that the total of the overcharges amounted to $2,861.85; and that three times the aggregate amount of the overcharges equals $8,585.55. The answer denied allegations (a) and (b).

On…