Legal Opinion
Rayess v. Lane Drug Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided June 25, 1941No. 28509PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHajrt, J.
The record in this case calls for the determination of the validity of a contract between certain interested parties purporting to regulate and fix the retail prices for the sale of cigarettes in the state of Ohio. Such determination requires an examination of the Fair Trade Act of the state, the terms of the contract, the circumstances surrounding its execution, and the effect of its operation.
The Ohio Fair Trade Act (116 Ohio Laws, pt. 2, 185), effective July 9, 1936, is a part of Chapter 31, Title II, Part Second of the General Code, defining and dealing generally with the subject of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Old Dearborn Distributing Co. v. Seagram-Distillers Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Max Factor & Co. v. KunsmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
- Goldsmith v. Mead Johnson & Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1939
- Seagram-Distillers Corp. v. Old Dearborn Distributing Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1936
3Cited by11 opinions
- In Re Title Insurance Antitrust CasesDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2010
- United States v. Bausch & Lomb Optical Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1942
- Shuman v. Bernie's Drug ConcessionsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Trigo Hermanos, Inc. v. Sobrino de Izquierdo, Inc.Supreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1951
- Pazen v. Silver Rod Stores, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1941
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.