Legal Opinion
Cosmetic Gallery, Inc. v. Schoeneman Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided July 19, 2007No. 05-3679PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
SCIRICA, Chief Judge.
At issue in this civil antitrust suit alleging a group boycott is whether plaintiff offered sufficient evidence to survive defendants’ motion for summary judgment. We will affirm the grant of summary judgment.
I
Plaintiff Cosmetic Gallery, Inc. is a New Jersey corporation that owns, and operates a hair salon and retails hair care products and professional beauty supplies. Defendant Schoeneman Corporation is a Pennsylvania corporation, owned and operated by co-defendant F. Dale Schoeneman, and does business as Schoeneman Beauty Supply, a wholesale…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Theatre Enterprises, Inc. v. Paramount Film Distributing Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1954
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Burtch v. Milberg Factors, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2011
- In Re Insurance Brokerage Antitrust LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
- SD3, LLC v. Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2015
- N. Am. Soccer League, LLC v. U.S. Soccer Fed'n, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2018
- In Re Wellbutrin XL Antitrust Litigation Indirect Purchaser ClassCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2017
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.