Legal Opinion
Rose v. Vulcan Materials Company
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided February 14, 1973No. 41PublishedCited by 129 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HUSKINS, Justice.
Defendant contends that the contract denominated Exhibit B, entered into by its assignor J. E. Dooley and Son, Inc.,, providing that J. E. Dooley and Son, Inc., would sell stone f.o.b.. the Cycle quarry to plaintiff at certain specified prices and. would “not sell any stone to anyone other than the State Highway-Commission for prices less than [certain specified higher prices]! from the Cycle quarry” was in violation of both the Robinson-Patman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 13(a) (1971) and State antitrust law and so was unenforceable.
Illegality is an affirmative defense, G.S. 1A-1, Rule…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, Appts. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Board of Trade of Chicago v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- United States v. American Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Austin Instrument, Inc. v. Loral Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1971
- Knutton v. CofieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by129 opinions
- Dunlap v. Colorado Springs Cablevision, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1992
- Cameron v. New Hanover Memorial Hospital, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
- Skinner v. Preferred CreditSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2006
- International Paper Co. v. Corporex Constructors, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
- Collins v. DavisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
124 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.