Lester B. Patterson

Text (OCR of the scan; may contain errors)

LESTER B. PATTERSON ET AL. TRADING AS

SKIL-WEAVE CO. ET AL.

Docket 7818. Order, July 24, 1959 Order vacating initial decision and remanding case to develop a record for disposal of the matter as to certain respondents. The Commission having considered the hearing examiner’s initial decision, filed June 9, 1959, wherein it was ordered that. the complaint be dismissed as to the respondents Grant, Schwenck & Baker, Inc., a corporation, and Paul Grant, mdividually and as an officer of said corporation, service of which was completed on June 26, 1959; and It appearing that said initial decision was based on a motion to dismiss as to said respondents, filed by counsel in support of the

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS, ETC. 1633

complaint, in which it was alleged that the Commission has entered a final order against the respondents, Lester B. Patterson and Edythe F. Patterson, copartners trading as Skil-Weave Co., and that the complained of practices have all been proscribed by said order and are effectively eliminated; and The Commission being of the opinion that the aforesaid allegations do not constitute adequate grounds for dismissal as to the other respondents named in the complaint:

It is ordered, That the initial decision of the hearing examiner be, and it hereby is, vacated and set aside.

It is further ordered, That the case be, and it hereby is remanded to the hearing examiner for the development of a record on the basis of which the matter may be disposed of on the merits as to the respondents Grant, Schwenck & Baker, Inc., and Paul Grant, individually and as an officer of said corporation.

ART NATIONAL MANUFACTURERS DISTRIBUTING

COMPANY. INC., ET AL.

Docket 7286. Order, July 28, 1959 Interlocutory order denying respondents’ motion to vacate order designating a substitute hearing examiner to replace one deceased. Counsel for respondents having filed a motion to vacate an order designating a substitute hearing examiner to replace Examiner Joseph Callaway, deceased, together with a motion for interlocutory appeal and stay of proceedings pending disposition thereof; and. The Commission being of the opinion that respondents have made no showing that they are prejudiced in any respect by the substitution or that the newly designated hearing examiner will not protect. respondents’ rights to a full and fair hearing on the merits of this case and in the procedural aspects of the proceeding:

It is ordered, That the aforesaid motions of respondents, and their request for oral argument thereon, be, and they hereby are, denied.