United States v. Johnson

Johnson (defendant), a landlord, arranged for a tenant to sue him under a fictitious name ("One Roach") claiming rent overcharges under the Emergency Price Control Act. Johnson moved to dismiss, arguing the Act was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power, and the United States intervened to defend the statute. The district court granted dismissal, but before final judgment the government moved to reopen, showing the plaintiff's own affidavit that the suit was a "friendly suit" arranged by Johnson, who paid for and directed the plaintiff's attorney while the plaintiff never even read the complaint or expected to incur any costs. Johnson's own affidavit confirmed these facts. The district court denied the motion to reopen, and the government appealed both the constitutional ruling and the refusal to dismiss for collusion.