United States v. United Shoe Machinery Co.
District Court, E.D. Missouri
In Equity. Suit by the United States against the United Shoe Machinery Company and others. On motion to dismiss. This is an action to enjoin the defendants, the United Shoe Machinery Company, a corporation existing under the laws of the state of Maine, the United Shoe Machinery Company, a corporation existing under the laws of the state of New Jersey, the United Shoe 'Machinery Corporation, also existing under the laws of the state of New Jersey, and certain individuals,…
Read the full summary
In Equity. Suit by the United States against the United Shoe Machinery Company and others. On motion to dismiss. This is an action to enjoin the defendants, the United Shoe Machinery Company, a corporation existing under the laws of the state of Maine, the United Shoe Machinery Company, a corporation existing under the laws of the state of New Jersey, the United Shoe 'Machinery Corporation, also existing under the laws of the state of New Jersey, and certain individuals, alleged to be the directors and officers of these corporations, from enforcing, or attempting to enforce, certain…
1Opinion of the CourtTrieber, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). Section 3 of the Clayton Act, which was invoked as the basis for this action, is as follows:
“Sec. 3. That it shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, to lease or make a sale or contract for sale of goods, wares, merchandise, machinery, supplies or other commodities, whether patented or unpatented, for use, consumption or resale within the United States or any territory thereof or the District of Columbia or any insular possession or other place under thoe jurisdiction of the United States, or fix a price charged…
2Cases cited66 opinions
- Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, Appts. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Fletcher v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1810
- Swift & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1897
- In Re DebsSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
61 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Houston Canning Co. v. Virginia Can Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1924
- United States v. United Shoe Machinery Co.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1920
- In re the Appraisal under the Transfer Tax Law of the Property of DavisonNew York Surrogate's Court · 1930
- United States v. Johns-Manville CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1964
- Duvall v. BoyerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1930
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.