Legal Opinion
Philips Business Systems, Inc. v. Executive Business Systems, Inc.
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided September 15, 1983No. 83-CV-1221, 83-CV-1222PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ORDER
BRAMWELL, District Judge.
Defendants in these two antitrust actions move to dismiss the complaints pursuant to Rules 11 and 12(b)(6) of the Fed.R.Civ.Pro. as well as Section 4 of the Clayton Act, 15 U. S.C. § 15, and Section 2(f) of the Robinson-Patman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 13(f). Plaintiff sues in both cases alleging that defendants have induced and are receiving discriminatory prices in violation of foregoing antitrust statutes. 1 For reasons the court shall now set forth both motions are granted pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). 2
BACKGROUND 3
Until July of 1981 plaintiff Philips…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Roadway Express, Inc. v. PiperSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United Mine Workers v. PenningtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking UnlimitedSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1984
- Philips Business Systems, Inc. v. Executive Communications Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984
- Philips Business Systems, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Executive Communications Systems, Inc., Trading as Executive Communications Systems, Charles McGuire and Cornelius Fitzsimons, Defendants-Appellees-Cross-Appellants. Philips Business Systems, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Don A. Carlos, D/B/A D and S Business Systems, D and S Word Processing Systems, and Diskriter, Defendants-Appellees-Cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984