Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Patterson v. . R. R.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided June 22, 1938PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBarnhill, J.
The plaintiff sued for recovery of damages caused by alleged injury to his business of hauling gasoline and kerosene, by means of a conspiracy entered into by the defendants to reduce transportation rates in order to eliminate plaintiff as a competitor, with the purpose of raising such rates after competition had been removed. The defendants answered the complaint, denying the material allegations thereof and setting up numerous defenses, amongst which are the following:
1. Paragraph 7 of the first further defense of defendants (except Piedmont Northern Railroad Company): "The effect of the…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Armstrong v. TolerSupreme Court of the United States · 1826
- Sunflower Lumber Co. v. Turner Supply Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1909
- Banks v. McCosker & MolloyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1896
- State v. Atlantic Ice & Coal Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Lloyd v. North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Greene v. Charlotte Chemical Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
- Champs Convenience Stores, Inc. v. United Chemical Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
- Herndon v. . MasseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Parrish v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Sprinkle v. PonderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.