Legal Opinion

Peterbilt-Southern Sales, Inc. v. Pacific Car and Foundry Company

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided December 3, 1963No. 20447Published

1Per curiam

There was ample basis in the evidence for the conclusion of the District Court that the account which forms the basis of the judgment was kept separate and apart from the other accounts for which suit was filed; and that the transaction out of which it arose was in interstate commerce and therefore not subject to the Texas Antitrust Statutes, Vernon’s Ann.Tex.Stat. Art. 7426 et seq., and to the defense based thereon. See Albertype Co. v. Gust Feist Co., 1909, 102 Tex. 219, 114 S.W. 791; Hughes Bros. Mfg. Co. v. Cicero Trust & Savings Bank, 5 Cir., 1928, 24 F.2d 199, and 15 C.J.S. Commerce §…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Fuqua, Hinkle & Davis v. Pabst Brewing Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Albertype Co. v. Gust Feist Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Segal v. McCall CompanyTexas Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Hughes Bros. Mfg. Co. v. Cicero Trust & Savings BankCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1928
  5. Kissel Motor Car Co. v. WalkerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1921

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

Powered by the Exa API