Legal Opinion
Albert Levine Associates v. Bertoni & Cotti
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided June 16, 1970No. 68 Civ. 4238PublishedCited by 38 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
METZNER, District Judge.
Defendants Tupes of Saginaw, Inc. and Robert Tupes move to quash service or in the alternative for change of venue.
The jurisdictional bases of the claim as alleged in paragraph 4 of the complaint are §§ 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 15 and 26. The complaint seeks damages and an injunction for alleged violations of the antitrust laws of the United States. The action is purely statutory, and the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over such an action. General Investment Co. v. Lake Shore & Mich. So. Ry., 260 U.S. 261, 43 S.Ct. 106, 67 L.Ed. 244 (1922);…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- General Investment Co. v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Vanity Fair Mills, Inc. v. The T. Eaton Co. Limited and John David EatonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
- Blumenstock Bros. Advertising Agency v. Curtis Publishing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Philadelphia Housing Authority v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1968
- Northwestern Oil Co. v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1943
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Honda Associates, Inc. v. Nozawa Trading, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1974
- Farmers Bank of State of Del. v. Bell Mtg. Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1978
- GTE New Media Services, Inc. v. Ameritech Corp.District Court, District of Columbia · 1998
- Merriman v. Crompton Corp.Supreme Court of Kansas · 2006
- Sunrise Toyota, Ltd. v. Toyota Motor Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1972
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.