Legal Opinion
Shibo Hayashi v. Red Wing Peat Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided May 10, 1968No. 21749_1PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Per curiam
Appellee moved to dismiss an antitrust action, as to appellee, for improper venue. The motion was granted. We affirm on the ground stated in the district court’s opinion, Hayashi v. Sunshine Garden Products, Inc., 285 F.Supp. 632 (W. D.Wash.1967).
Appellants contend that the district court erroneously believed that it was required to pass upon the motion without allowing discovery.
Of course the trial court may permit discovery on such a motion, and indeed should do so where discovery may be useful in resolving issues of fact presented by the motion, particularly since the necessity of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. HollandSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Bertha Building Corporation v. National Theatres Corporation, Gumbiner Theatrical Enterprises, Inc. v. National Theatres CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957
- Victor Surpitski v. Hughes-Keenan Corporation, Etc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1966
- Giusti v. Pyrotechnic Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1946
- Urquhart v. American-La France Foamite CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1944
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Piedmont Label Company v. Sun Garden Packing CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1979
- Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. Buttes Gas & Oil Co.District Court, C.D. California · 1971
- Idaho Potato Commission v. Washington Potato CommissionDistrict Court, D. Idaho · 1976
- Grappone, Inc. v. Subaru of America, Inc.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 1975
- California Clippers, Inc. v. United States Soccer Football Ass'nDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1970
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.