Legal Opinion
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Blade
District Court, S.D. California
Decided June 29, 1954No. Civ. No. 14079PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HALL, District Judge.
The original complaint in this matter was filed on May 2,1952. It was in three causes of action: the first for alleged liability under the Sherman Act, 15 U.S. C.A. §§ 1-7, 15 note; the second for alleged liability under the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 12 et seq., and the third a count for damages for fraud.
Upon motions to dismiss, an order was made granting the motion to dismiss without leave to amend as to the first and second causes of action and granting the motion to dismiss as to the third cause of action with leave to amend. See Sears, Roebuck v. Blade, D.C., 110 F.…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Southern Pacific Co. v. BogertSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Suckow Borax Mines Consolidated, Inc. v. Borax Consolidated, LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1950
- William W. Bierce, Ltd. v. HutchinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Robb v. VosSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Philpott v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Metropolitan EngraversCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1956
- Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Metropolitan Engravers, LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
- Bissett v. BarnettDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1956
- R Consulting & Sales, Inc. v. Old Republic Ins. Co.District Court, S.D. California · 2018
- United States v. RolencDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1972