Legal Opinion
Sherwood v. Microsoft Corp.
District Court, M.D. Tennessee
Decided February 22, 2000No. 3:99-1191PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
HAYNES, District Judge.
Plaintiffs, Daniel Sherwood, Roy Cog-gins and Sheila Coggins, doing business as Microfilm Services and William Overton, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated Tennessee citizens, filed this class action originally in the Circuit Court for the Twenty Eighth Judicial District of Tennessee against the defendant Microsoft Corporation, a Washington corporation with its principal place of business in Redmon, Washington. Plaintiffs’ claims arise under the Tennessee antitrust statutes, Tenn.Code.Ann. § 47-25-101 et. seq., and the Tennessee Consumer…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Saint Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. SheetsSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Healy v. RattaSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Carol L. Kirchner GAFFORD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1993
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Julie Olden, Richard Hunter, Wilbur Bleau, and All Others Similarly Situated v. Lafarge Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
- McIntire v. Ford Motor Co.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2001
- Strategic Assets, Inc. v. Federal Express Corp.District Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2001
- SOUTHERN STATES POLICE BENEVOLENT ASS'N, INC. v. Second Chance Body Armor, Inc.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 2004
- Rucker v. LynchDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 2025
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.