Wedgewood Investment Corp. v. International Harvester Co.
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HAIRE, Judge.
The issues raised on this appeal from a summary judgment require that this Court determine whether the performance of an agreement between the appellant-dealer (referred to herein as “Nassers”) and the appellee-manufacturer (International Harvester) would be illegal as a per se antitrust violation, and, if so, whether that illegality would preclude the enforcement of Nassers’ claim for damage for the alleged breach thereof by International Harvester. The trial court decided both of these issues in favor of International Harvester.
Reviewing first those facts which, for the…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, Appts. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Continental T. v. Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- White Motor Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Mothershed v. Justices of the Supreme CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Bunker's Glass Co. v. PILKINGTON, PLCArizona Supreme Court · 2003
- In Re Terazosin Hydrochloride Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2001
- Bunker's Glass Co. v. Pilkington PlCCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
- Three Phoenix Co. v. Pace Industries, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1983
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.