Legal Opinion
In Re Uranium Industry Antitrust Litigation
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
Decided February 27, 1979No. 342Published
1Opinion of the Court
466 F.Supp. 958 (1979)
In re URANIUM INDUSTRY ANTITRUST LITIGATION.
Homestake Mining Corp.
v.
Enerdyne Corp., D. New Mexico, C.A. No. 77-609 P.
No. 342.
Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.
February 27, 1979.
Before MURRAY I. GURFEIN, Chairman, and EDWIN A. ROBSON, STANLEY A. WEIGEL, ANDREW A. CAFFREY, ROY W. HARPER, and CHARLES R. WEINER, Judges of the Panel.
OPINION AND ORDER
2Per curiam
I. BACKGROUND
A. The Actions In The Transferee District
On July 31, 1978, the Panel, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, transferred three actions (the TVA actions) to the Northern District of Illinois and, with the consent of…
3Cases cited7 opinions
- Westinghouse Electric Corporation v. Gulf Oil Corporation, and United Nuclear CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1978
- In re A. H. Robins Co.United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 1978
- In Re Westinghouse Electric Corporation Uranium Contract LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 1977
- In Re Westinghouse Electric Corp. Uranium Contracts LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 1975
- In Re Uranium Industry Antitrust LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 1978
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.