Legal Opinion
In Re Amino Acid Lysine Antitrust Litigation
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided March 6, 1996No. 95 C 7679, 96 C 531PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
918 F.Supp. 1181 (1996)
In re AMINO ACID LYSINE ANTITRUST LITIGATION.
Jack ASHLEY, individually, etc., Plaintiff,
v.
ARCHER DANIELS MIDLAND CO., et al., Defendants.
Nos. 95 C 7679, 96 C 531.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division.
February 26, 1996.
Supplemental Order March 6, 1996.
J. Michael Rediker, Ritchie & Rediker, P.C., Birmingham, AL, Michael Straus, Bainbridge & Straus, Birmingham, AL, Michael Lawrence Fees, Herman A. Watson, Watson, Gammons & Fees, P.C., Huntsville, AL, for Jack Ashley.
L. Vastine Stabler, Jr., Walston, Stabler, Wells, Anderson & Bains, Birmington, AL,…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Saint Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- In Re NASDAQ Market Makers Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Nicholson v. Marine Corps West Federal Credit UnionDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1997
- Tisdale v. A.G. Edwards & SonsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Welborn v. Ethicon Inc.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 2022