Legal Opinion
Boro Hall Corporation v. General Motors Corporation
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 28, 1941PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CONGER, District Judge.
On motion of the defendants the complaint is dismissed.
The complaint, in two counts, claims a conspiracy on the part of all the defendants, in violation of the federal anti-trust laws, and amendments thereto, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1 et seq., to restrain the trade of plaintiffs “and others” in the used car field ánd in the service and supply business.
Defendant General Motors Corporation makes Chevrolet cars. Defendant General Motors Sales Corporation is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the former and has charge of distribution and sales of Chevrolet cars. Defendant Holler is general…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Anderson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Bigelow v. Calumet & Hecla Mining Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1909
- C. S. Smith Metropolitan Market Co. v. Food & Grocery Bureau of Southern California, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 1939
- Lincoln Motor Co. v. Lincoln Automobile Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1930
3Cited by5 opinions
- National Screen Service Corporation v. The Poster Exchange, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
- Emmons v. SmittDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1944
- Package Closure Corp. v. Sealright Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1943
- Boro Hall Corp. v. General Motors Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1946
- United States v. General Motors CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1963