Legal Opinion
South Side Drive-In Co. v. Warner Bros. Pictures Distributing Corp.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided February 23, 1962No. Civ. A. No. 29700PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LUONGO, District Judge.
As one of the opening phases of this anti-trust action, we have before us defendants’ motion pursuant to Rule 12, F.R.Civ.P. 28 U.S.C.A., to strike various paragraphs of the complaint. Plaintiff, owner and operator of a drive-in or outdoor theatre, alleges violations of the Sherman and Clayton Acts, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1 et seq., by defendants, eight distributors and two exhibitors of motion pictures.
Rule 8(a) (2) requires that a complaint consist of “ * * * a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief”. Motions to strike, however,…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Theatre Enterprises, Inc. v. Paramount Film Distributing Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1954
- United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1946
- Milwaukee Towne Corp. v. Loew's, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1951
- United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1949
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Wohl v. Blair & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1970
- Quality Discount Tires, Inc. v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
- Fuchs Sugars & Syrups, Inc. v. Amstar CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1975
- Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1962
- Simco Sales Service of Pennsylvania, Inc. v. Air Reduction Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1963
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.