Legal Opinion

AMF Pinspotters, Inc. v. Harkins Bowling, Inc.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 28, 1961No. 38,210, 38,341PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Frank T. Gallagher, Justice.

This action involves two appeals by defendant, Harkins Bowling, Inc., which we shall consider separately. The first is from orders of the district court (1) denying defendant’s motion to dismiss the temporary restraining order and granting the motion of plaintiff, AMF Pinspotters, Inc., for a temporary injunction, and (2) denying defend ant’s motion to vacate and dismiss the temporary injunction. The second appeal is from a district court order granting plaintiff’s motion to strike defendant’s antitrust defenses.

Parti

Due to the somewhat prolonged procedural history…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Thomas v. RambergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
  2. J. F. Quest Foundry Co. v. International Molders & Foundry Workers UnionSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
  3. Steller v. ThomasSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  4. Nielsen v. City of Albert LeaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
  5. General Minnesota Utilities Co. v. Carlton County Cooperative Power Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1946

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. Cherne Industrial, Inc. v. Grounds & Associates, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  2. Dahlberg Brothers, Inc. v. Ford Motor CompanySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1965
  3. Vaughn & Co. v. SaulCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
  4. Humenansky v. Minnesota Board of Medical ExaminersCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1994
  5. Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. v. LoescherSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980

38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API