Legal Opinion

United States v. Sisal Sales Corp.

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided May 16, 1927No. 200PublishedCited by 93 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice McReynolds

The United States seek an injunction to .prevent appellees from taking further action in pursuance of a con-, tract, combination or conspiracy said to be forbidden by the Sherman Anti-trust Act and the Wilson Tariff Act as amended, c. 647, 26 Stat. 209; c. 349, 28 Stat. 509, 570; c. 40, 37 Stat. 667. The trial court regarded American Banana Co. v. United Fruit Co., 213 U. S. 347, as controlling; held that no cause of action had been alleged; and dismissed the bill upon motion.

The bill is confused, difficult to follow, and an excellent example of bad pleading. An order should direct that it be…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. American Banana Co. v. United Fruit Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909

3Cited by93 opinions

  1. Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 2010
  2. United States v. Aluminum Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
  3. Continental Ore Co. v. Union Carbide & Carbon Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
  4. Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. Steele v. Bulova Watch Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952

88 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