Legal Opinion
In re California Armored Car Antitrust Litigation
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
Decided August 16, 1979No. 387PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
2Per curiam
This litigation consists of three actions pending in two districts: two actions in the Northern District of California, and one action in the Central District of California.
The three actions were spawned, in large part, by two indictments returned on March 9, 1979, by a federal grand jury sitting in the Central District of California. One indictment charged that Loomis Armored Car Service, Inc. (Loomis) conspired with Brink’s, Inc. (Brink’s) and other unindicted co-conspirators in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act to submit two rigged bids for armored car services to…
3Cases cited3 opinions
- Douglas Oil Co. of Cal. v. Petrol Stops NorthwestSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- In Re Hawaiian Hotel Room Rate Antitrust LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 1977
- In Re Wiring Device Antitrust LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 1978
4Cited by2 opinions
- In Re Cuisinart Food Processor Antitrust LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 1981
- In re Marine Construction Antitrust LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 1980