Legal Opinion

Mead Johnson & Co. v. Martin Wholesale Distributors, Inc.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 28, 1962No. Appeal, No. 212PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Musmanno,

This is a case involving interpretation and application of Pennsylvania’s Pair Trade Act (Act of June 5, 1935, P. L. 266, §2, as amended, 73 PS §8). The plaintiff, Mead Johnson & Company, asked for and obtained a preliminary injunction against the defendant, Martin Wholesale Distributors, Inc. The defendant appealed.

The plaintiff (an Indiana corporation doing business in Pennsylvania) manufactures and sells certain nationally advertised products known as “Dextri-Maltose,” “Poli-Visol,” “Tri-Vi-Sol”, “Lactum” and others. It has entered into contracts with various…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Old Dearborn Distributing Co. v. Seagram-Distillers Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
  2. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission v. IsraelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  3. Slott v. Plastic Fabricators, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  4. Commonwealth v. KatzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  5. Lentheric, Inc. v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. House of Seagram, Inc. v. Assam Drug Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Philadelphia Minit-Man Car Wash Corp. v. Building & Construction Trades CouncilSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  3. Allegheny County Tax Assessment AppealsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  4. Neshaminy Constructors, Inc. v. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Building & Construction Trades CouncilSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  5. Logan Valley Plaza, Inc. v. Amalgamated Food Employees Union, Local 590Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967

12 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