Legal Opinion
United States v. Blue Bell, Inc.
District Court, M.D. Tennessee
Decided February 19, 1975No. Civ. A. 7004PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
MORTON, District Judge.
I. THE COMPLAINT
On April 25, 1973, the United States filed this civil action under Section 15 of the Act of Congress of October 15, 1914, as amended (15 U.S.C. Sec. 25), commonly known as the Clayton Act, to prevent and restrain the violation by defendant Blue Bell, Inc. of Section 7 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. See. 18). The violation charged was Blue Bell’s acquisition on or about July 21, 1972 of the assets of the Hayes Company Division of Genesco, Inc. Genesco was also made a defendant for purposes of relief. The Government…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- United States v. Grinnell Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Brown Shoe Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- United States v. Philadelphia National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- United States v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
- United States v. Marine Bancorporation, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981
- Grumman Corporation v. The Ltv Corporation, Ckh Corporation, Jones & Laughlin Industries, Inc. And Vought CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
- Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. N.V. v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2008
- White Mule Co. v. ATC LEASING CO. LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2008
- Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2008
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.