Legal Opinion
James E. Dougherty v. Continental Oil Company, Truman Arnold Distributing Co., Inc., Genico Distributors, Inc., and Reed Distributing Co.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided September 11, 1978No. 77-2373PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GODBOLD, Circuit Judge:
This is an antitrust case brought by commission agents of Continental Oil Company (Conoco) against Conoco and some of Cono-co’s jobbers. In answers to special interrogatories the jury found that Conoco and its jobbers had violated § 1 of the Sherman Act and assessed damages against the defendants at approximately $8.4 million after trebling. We reverse.
The case arose out of Conoco’s decision to reshape its methods of gasoline marketing in Texas. Prior to 1975 Conoco marketed branded gasoline in three ways. First, Con-oco sold gasoline and gasoline products directly to…
2Cases cited47 opinions
- Hamling v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Bradley v. School Bd. of RichmondSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Continental T. v. Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- United States v. Colgate & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1919
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- L.A. Draper & Son v. Wheelabrator-Frye, Inc., a Corporation Hessco Industrial Supply, Inc., a Corporation Fred Z. Hester, an IndividualCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1984
- Stuart M. Kaplan, as Trustee in Bankruptcy for Palmer Data Corporation D/B/A Computerminal v. Burroughs CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- Aladdin Oil Company v. Texaco, Inc. And Poweram Oil Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1979
- Emeilia Cann and Charles Cann v. Ford Motor CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
- Meyers v. MoodyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1982
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.