Legal Opinion

United States v. Johns-Manville Corporation

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided December 22, 1964No. Civ. A. 31791PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAN DUSEN, District Judge.

This case is before the court on Keasbey and Mattison Company’s (hereinafter sometimes called “defendant”) Motion for Summary Judgment under Rule 56 (Document 9). 1

The present Civil Action, which was filed on July 25, 1962 (Document 1), was brought by the United States Government against three companies: Keasbey and Mattison Company (hereinafter sometimes referred to as “K & M”), Johns-Manville Corporation, and Certain-teed Products Corporation (hereinafter referred to as “Certain-teed”). The Complaint was brought under § 4 of the Sherman Antitrust Act and alleges a…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. United States v. W. T. Grant Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
  3. United States v. Oregon State Medical SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  4. United States v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
  5. United States v. United States Steel CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1920

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. United States v. Johns-Manville CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1966
  3. United States v. Nicolet, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1989
  4. United States v. Johns-Manville CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1965
  5. United States v. Packorp, Inc.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 1965

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API