Legal Opinion

General Corp. v. General Motors Corp.

District Court, D. Minnesota

Decided April 12, 1956No. Civ. No. 2713PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DONOVAN, District Judge.

Plaintiff commenced an action for treble damages against the defendant, based on violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.1 Counsel agree that in private suits under the anti-trust laws, where Congress is silent on limitation of time to commence suit, the period within which actions under such statute must be instituted is governed by local law.2

Defendant, by answer, pleads the Minnesota Statute of Limitations.3 Plaintiff is now before the Court seeking to strike that defense. Counsel disagree on whether the Minnesota two-year, or six-year, limit should govern.

The basic…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Holmberg v. ArmbrechtSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Cohen v. GouldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
  3. Fulton v. Loew's, Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 1953
  4. Tomasko v. CottonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1937
  5. Homewood Theatre, Inc. v. Loew's Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1951

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Fox Chemical Co. v. Amsoil, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1978
  2. General Corporation v. General Motors CorporationDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1960
  3. Klapmeier v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1973
  4. STATE OF MINN. BY HUMPHREY v. Standard Oil Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1983
  5. City of Minneapolis v. SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974

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

Powered by the Exa API