CENTURY HARDWARE CORPORATION v. Powernail Company
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT
I. FACTS
REYNOLDS, District Judge.
Before this court is a motion by defendants to dismiss this case on grounds that the applicable statute of limitations has expired. In the view of this court,, the motion must be granted.
The plaintiff, Century Hardware Corporation, claims that it had been a dealer in certain of defendants’ products and that defendants undertook a plan employing various coercive devices to keep resale prices of these products at a high level. It maintains that its dealership was terminated because of refusal to comply with the plan, that…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Momand v. Universal Film Exchanges, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1948
- Kincheloe v. FarmerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1954
- Highland Supply Corporation v. Reynolds Metals Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1964
- Emich Motors Corporation and U. S. Acceptance Corporation v. General Motors Corporation and General Motors Acceptance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1956
- Robert Hoopes and Rae S. Hoopes v. Union Oil Company of California, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1967
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Contract Buyers League v. F & F INVESTMENTDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1969
- Hazeltine Research, Inc., and Counter-Defendant v. Zenith Radio Corporation, and Counter-ClaimantCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1969
- Davenport v. Deseret Pharmaceutical Co.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 1971
- Boyd v. Briarwood Ford, Inc. (In re Check Reporting Services, Inc.)District Court, W.D. Michigan · 1991