Legal Opinion

United States v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Co.

District Court, S.D. Iowa

Decided April 5, 1984No. Civ. 83-51-DPublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION, RULINGS AND ORDER GRANTING PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

VIETOR, District Judge.

The government’s complaint alleges that defendants violated section I of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, and section 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18.

In respect to the Clayton Act claim the defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment and the government has filed a cross-motion for partial summary judgment. The motions raise the issue of whether a lease agreement entered into between defendant Nabisco Brands, Inc. (Nabisco) as lessor and defendant Archer-Daniels-Midland Company (ADM) as…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. Philadelphia National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Federal Trade Commission v. Western Meat Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  3. United States v. Columbia Pictures CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1960
  4. Federal Trade Commission v. Thatcher Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1925
  5. International Telephone and Telegraph Corp. v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1978

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Gerlinger v. Amazon. Com, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2004
  2. United States v. Rockford Memorial Corp.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1989
  3. United States v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Company and Nabisco Brands, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1986
  4. United States v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Co.District Court, S.D. Iowa · 1991
  5. United States v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Co.District Court, S.D. Iowa · 1987

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API