Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery Corporation
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
SHERIDAN, Chief Judge.
I
INTRODUCTION
This is a private antitrust action which arises under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, Act of July 2, 1890, c. 647, 26 Stat. 209, as amended, 15 U.S.C.A. § 2, and under Section 4 of the Clayton Act, Act of October 15, 1914, c. 323, 38 Stat. 731, 15 U.S.C.A. § 15, to recover treble damages for defendant’s alleged monopolization of the shoe machinery industry, and, particularly, its alleged monopolistic practices with respect to substantially all shoe machinery required and used by plaintiff, The Hanover Shoe, Inc. (Hanover).
The complaint, as amended, alleges in…
2Cases cited78 opinions
- Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Richards v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- United States v. Aluminum Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
73 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- City of Detroit v. Grinnell Corporation, Manhattan-Ward, Incorporated v. Grinnell Corporation, 1225 Vine Street Building, Inc. v. Grinnell CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974
- Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Berkey Photo, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross v. Eastman Kodak Company, Defendant-Appellant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1979
- Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Howard R. Hughes, and Hughes Tool Company and Raymond M. HollidayCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1971
- Pacific Coast Agricultural Export Ass'n v. Sunkist Growers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.