Legal Opinion
Mitchell Woodbury Corp. v. Albert Pick-Barth Co.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided December 5, 1929No. 4087PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBrewster, J.
This is an action brought to recover threefold damages alleged to have been sustained by reason of aets forbidden-by the anti-trust laws (U. S. C. tit. 15, § 15 (15 USCA § 15). The plaintiff and two of the defendants are citizens of Massachusetts. The defendant corporation has interposed a pleading entitled “Motion to dismiss, demurrer and answer to the jurisdiction.”
Two questions are presented by this pleading:
First. Whether the court can take jurisdiction of the proceeding; there being no diversity of citizenship.
Second. Whether, if the court has jurisdiction, the allegations of the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Swift & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Moore v. New York Cotton ExchangeSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- United Mine Workers v. Coronado Coal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Binderup v. Pathe Exchange, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- D. R. Wilder Manufacturing Co. v. Corn Products Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Glenn Coal Co. v. Dickinson Fuel Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1934
- Sunbeam Corp. v. Payless Drug StoresDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1953
- Neumann v. Bastian-Blessing Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1946