Legal Opinion
State v. Mobil Oil Corp.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided January 6, 1976PublishedCited by 83 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.
We conclude that a systematic and deliberate practice of price discrimination by respondent oil company in the sale of gasoline to its dealers as alleged by the Attorney-General in this case would not fall within the proscription of *462our State’s Donnelly Act (General Business Law, art 22, § 340 et seq.)1
The allegations are that notwithstanding its establishment of a uniform tank wagon price in each terminal area, the oil company has granted substantial discriminatory rebates (so-called "dealer aid”) to some of its dealers and not to others, and then inconsistently. The complaint charges that…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Bouie v. City of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Lanzetta v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Standard Oil Co. v. Federal Trade CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- In re the Arbitration between Aimcee Wholesale Corp. & Tomar Products, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1968
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by83 opinions
- Capital Telephone Co. v. Pattersonville Telephone Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1982
- People v. Mobil Oil Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1979
- Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. AbramsNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- Knight-Ridder Broadcasting, Inc. v. GreenbergNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- Re-Alco Industries, Inc. v. National Center for Health Education, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1993
78 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.