McCutcheon v. Merz Capsule Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the East* ern District of Michigan. Two corporations and two partnerships, severally engaged in the manufacture and sale of hard, empty, gelatine capsules, entered into an agreement, dated November 29, 1893, for the combination and consolidation of their several properties and business interests.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the East* ern District of Michigan. Two corporations and two partnerships, severally engaged in the manufacture and sale of hard, empty, gelatine capsules, entered into an agreement, dated November 29, 1893, for the combination and consolidation of their several properties and business interests. The plan by which this was to be accomplished is fully set out in the agreement here following: “This agreement made the 29th day of November, 1893, between the National Capsule Company, a corporation organized under the laws of the state of New…
1Opinion of the Court
After stating the facts as above,
LURTON, Circuit Judge,
deliver* >d the opinion of the court.
The solution ot this case depends upon the validity of the agreement of November, 3893, and the subsequent contracts and conveyances made in furtherance thereof. The appeal perfected, and the errors assigned, involve, not only the propriety of the decree granting any relief to the complainant, but the decree dismissing the cross bill of the United States Capsule Company. The object of that cross bill was to have the agreement of November 29, 1893, and all the proceedings taken and conveyances made in…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Central Transportation Co. v. Pullman's Palace Car Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Thomas v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1880
- People ex rel. Peabody v. Chicago Gas Trust Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1889
- Thomas v. City of RichmondSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- St. Louis, Vandalia & Terre Haute Railroad v. Terre Haute & Indianapolis RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- State v. Northwest Magnesite Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1947
- Anglo-American Land, Mortgage & Agency Co. v. LombardCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- Forrester v. Boston & Montana Consolidated Copper & Silver Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1904
- Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. HirschCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1913
- State Ex Rel. Weede v. Iowa Southern Utilities Co. of DelawareSupreme Court of Iowa · 1942
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.