State Ex Rel. Clark v. Wolkoff
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Dell, Chief Justice.
In this action the state seeks to enjoin the defendants from offering and selling merchandise at less than cost as prohibited by law. Following a trial without a jury, the court found that while there were advertisements and sales at less than cost, there was not the necessary purpose or effect required by statute to constitute a violation of law and that, therefore, the defendants were entitled to judgment of dismissal on the merits. Plaintiff appeals from the order denying its alternative motion for amended findings and conclusions, or a new trial.
When this action was…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Fairmont Creamery Co. v. MinnesotaSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- State v. DeZelerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
- Commonwealth v. ZasloffSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- State v. SearsWashington Supreme Court · 1940
- McElhone v. GerorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1940
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Snowhite v. State, Use of TennantCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1966
- Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Oklahoma Retail Grocers Assn., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1959
- B.F. Specialty Co. v. Charles M. Sledd Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1996
- Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Oklahoma Retail Grocers Ass'nSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1957
- State Ex Rel. Anderson v. Fleming Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1959
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.