Legal Opinion
Johnson v. Soundview Apartments Housing Development Fund Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 3, 1984No. 81 Civ. 4803 (JES)PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION & ORDER
SPRIZZO, District Judge.
Defendants Soundview Apartments Housing Development Fund Co., Inc. and United Home for Aged Hebrews, have moved for reconsideration of their motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs’ claim that a mandatory meal plan at Soundview Apartments is an illegal tying arrangement proscribed by section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1. The facts are discussed in the Court’s Opinion and Order dated May 13, 1984. 585 F.Supp. 559. According to defendants, the requirement that Sound-view residents subscribe to the meal plan is not being enforced at this time. See…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Brown Shoe Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Jefferson Parish Hospital District No. 2 v. HydeSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Fortner Enterprises, Inc. v. United States Steel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
- David A. Yentsch, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Texaco, Inc., Defendant-Appellant-Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
- Angelo F. Coniglio v. Highwood Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Josefina Gonzalez, and Cross-Appellees v. St. Margaret's House Housing Development Fund Corporation, a New York Corporation, and Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
- Ringtown Wilbert Vault Works v. Schuylkill Memorial Park, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1986
- Johnson v. SOUNDVIEW APTS. HOUSING DEVELOP. FUNDDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1984