Legal Opinion
Chicago Mercantile Exchange v. Deaktor
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided December 3, 1973No. 73-241PublishedCited by 91 opinions
1Per curiam
The petitioner, Chicago Mercantile Exchange, was sued in two separate actions in the District Court. In one, the Phillips suit, it was alleged that the Exchange had forced sales of futures contracts in March 1970 fresh eggs at artificially depressed market prices and had thereby monopolized and restrained commerce in violation of §§ 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, 26 Stat. 209, as amended, 15 U. S. C. §§ 1, 2, and had violated § 9 (b) of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA), as amended, 82 Stat. 33, 7 U. S. C. § 13 (b), by manipulating prices of a commodity for future delivery on a contract market.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ricci v. Chicago Mercantile ExchangeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Darryl B. Deaktor v. L. D. Schreiber & Co., Al Phillips, Jr. v. The Chicago Mercantile ExchangeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1973
3Cited by91 opinions
- Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. CurranSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Robert Schaefer and Sandra Schaefer v. First National Bank of LincolnwoodCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1975
- Mashpee Tribe v. New Seabury Corp., Mashpee Tribe v. New Seabury Corp., Mashpee Tribe v. New Seabury Corp., Matthew B. Connolly, Etc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1979
- Leist v. SimplotCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
- Golden Hill Paugussett Tribe of Indians v. WeickerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
86 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.