Hartford-Empire Co. v. Obear-Nester Glass Co.
District Court, E.D. Missouri
1Opinion of the Court
HULEN, District Judge.
Plaintiff has filed a motion to strike from Count V of the second amended and supplemental counterclaim all reference to the judgment, findings and record in the case of United States v. Hartford-Empire Co., et al., 323 U.S. 386, 65 S.Ct. 373, 89 L.Ed. 322 *565referred to in this cause as the “Toledo •case”, on the ground that such allegations are “immaterial, impertinent and prejudicial”. Counts I to IV of the counterclaim seek to recover damages for injuries alleged to have been suffered in consequence of anti-trust law violations by plaintiff. Count V of the counterclaim…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Hartford-Empire Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Hartford-Empire Co. v. Obear-Nester Glass Co.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1947