Legal Opinion
Rossman v. Pullman Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided May 19, 1936PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GALSTON, District Judge.
Plaintiff brings this action pursuant to provisions of the anti-trust acts, seeking treble damages because of the violation thereof by the defendant company in so far as they affect her ownership of patents relating to sleeping car improvements.
On this motion to dismiss there are two fundamental problems involved, since under the Anti-Trust Acts (Clayton Act, § 4, Sherman Act, § 7), section 15, title 15, U.S.C. (15 U.S.C.A. § 15 and note) any person who shall be injured in his business or property by anything forbidden in the anti-trust laws may sue and recover…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
- United States v. American Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Bauer & Cie v. O'DonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Patterson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1915
3Cited by4 opinions
- Robert H. Martin v. Phillips Petroleum CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
- Waldron v. British Petroleum Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1964
- Morris v. Rental Tools, Inc.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1983
- Pastor v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1940