Calderone Enterprises Corporation v. United Artists Theatre Circuit, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Levet, District Judge, filed a dissenting opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
MANSFIELD, Circuit Judge:
This appeal raises once again the question whether one who is not a “target” of an alleged antitrust conspiracy has standing under § 4 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 15, to sue for treble the amount of damages suffered by it incidentally. In this case, suit is brought by a non-operating landlord of theatres allegedly used by its tenant and various motion picture distributors and exhibitors in furtherance of an antitrust conspiracy to restrain the trade of competing distributors and exhibitors. We *1294adhere to our prior decisions on the issue, see Fields Productions,…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, Appts. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- In re SkolnickSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Billy Baxter, Inc. v. The Coca-Cola Company and Cana Da Dry CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1970
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by151 opinions
- Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of CarpentersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Blue Shield of Va. v. McCreadySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- In Re Multidistrict Vehicle Air Pollution M.D.L. No. 31. State of California v. Automobile Manufacturers Association, Inc., Robert Morgan v. Automobile Manufacturers Association, Inc., City of Philadelphia v. Automobile Manufacturers Association, Inc., State of New York v. Automobile Manufacturers Association, Inc., City of New York v. Automobile Manufacturers Association, Inc., City and County of Denver v. American Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1973
- Litton Systems, Inc., Litton Business Telephone Systems, Inc., Litton Business Systems, Inc., and Litton Industries Credit Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellees- Cross v. American Telephone and Telegraph Company, Western Electric Company, Inc., Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc., New York Telephone Company, Inc., New Jersey Bell Telephone Company, Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company, the Ohio Bell Telephone Company, Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, and Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Company, Defendants-Appellants-Cross Litton Systems, Inc. v. Southwestern Bell Telephone CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
- Sealy, Incorporated, a Corporation v. Easy Living, Inc., a Corporation, and Danco, Inc., and Jack Ward Mattress, Inc., D/B/A Pacifica Mattress CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
146 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.