Legal Opinion

Mechanical Contractors Bid Depository, a Utah Corporation v. Harold Christiansen, Dba Palmer-Christiansen Company

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided December 23, 1965No. 7924_1PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WILLIAM E. DOYLE, District Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment awarding to the appellee Christiansen $60,000.00 in treble damages, together with attorney fees. The action was brought under the antitrust laws of the United States, Title 15 U.S.C. §§ 1, 2, and 15. 1

In addition to the opinion noted, the trial court filed detailed and thorough findings of fact and conclusions of law to which reference will be made herein.

The Utah Mechanical Bid Depository was organized in May, 1962, for the purpose of eliminating certain trade practices in bidding by mechanical specialty contractors.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
  3. Continental Ore Co. v. Union Carbide & Carbon Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
  4. Eastman Kodak Co. v. Southern Photo Materials Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
  5. International Salt Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1947

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. Richard S. Simpson v. Union Oil Company of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969
  3. Oakland-Alameda County Builders' Exchange v. F. P. Lathrop Construction Co.California Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Premier Electrical Construction Co. v. Miller-Davis Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1970
  5. Rubino v. LolliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API