Legal Opinion
CITY OF MOUNDRIDGE, KS. v. Exxon Mobil Corp.
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided January 9, 2007No. Civil Action 04-940 (RWR)PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
ROBERTS, District Judge.
Eighteen municipalities 1 sued Exxon Mobil Corporation, BP America, Inc., Coral Energy Resources, L.P., ChevronTexaco Corporation, and ConocoPhillips Corporation for violating the antitrust laws by agreeing to artificially inflate the price of natural gas; monopolizing, attempting to monopolize, and conspiring to monopolize; and engaging in price discrimination. The defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint for lack of standing, for lack of personal jurisdiction, for failure to state a claim as to all claims, and because defendants…
2Cases cited85 opinions
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of CarpentersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States v. Grinnell Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1966
80 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Navab-Safavi v. Broadcasting Board of GovernorsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009
- City of Moundridge v. Exxon Mobil Corp.District Court, District of Columbia · 2008
- In Re G-Fees Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2008
- Alemu v. Dep't of For-Hire VehiclesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
- In Re: McCormick & Company, Inc., Pepper Products Marketing and Sales Practices LitigationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.