Legal Opinion
In re Matzo Food Products Litigation
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided August 3, 1994No. Civ. A. No. 90-1146PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HAROLD A. ACKERMAN, District Judge:
This is a price-fixing antitrust action involving the sale of matzo and matzo products. Before me now is plaintiffs’ motion for final approval of the proposed settlement of this action pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and their application for an award of attorneys’ fees, costs, and incentive payments to the class representatives.
I. Factual and Procedural Background
On March 19, 1990, a federal grand jury indicted B. Manischewitz Co. (“Manischewitz”) for violations of the,Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1. The indictment charged…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Illinois Brick Co. v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- City of Detroit v. Grinnell Corporation, Manhattan-Ward, Incorporated v. Grinnell Corporation, 1225 Vine Street Building, Inc. v. Grinnell CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974
- Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Six (6) Mexican Workers v. Arizona Citrus Growers Bodine Produce Company, Inc. Robert Fletcher, D/B/A Fletcher FarmsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Grunin v. International House of PancakesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1975
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Kullar v. Foot Locker Retail, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2008
- Parker v. Time Warner Entertainment Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 2007
- D.M. v. TerhuneDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1999
- Hansen v. Government of the Virgin IslandsSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2010
- New Jersey Dep't of Envtl. Prot. v. Atlantic Richfield Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 2014
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.