Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Adrian C. Eichman v. Fotomat Corporation, a Delaware Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided May 10, 1985No. 82-5404Published

1ConcurrenceKennedy, Circuit Judge

I concur fully in Judge Ferguson’s opinion.

California’s antitrust statute, the Cartwright Act, Cal.Bus. & Prof.Code §§ 16700-60 (West 1964 & Supp.1985), follows the model of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 (1982). The congruity of the statutes led us to invoke res judicata and to hold, in earlier precedent, that where a plaintiff sustains an adverse judgment in a suit on the Cartwright Act in state court, he may not rely on the Sherman Act to relitigate the case in federal court. Derish v. San Mateo-Burlingame Board of Realtors, 724 F.2d 1347 (9th Cir.1983). The holding in Derish and its…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Marrese v. American Academy of Orthopaedic SurgeonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Derish v. San Mateo-Burlingame Board Of RealtorsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API