Legal Opinion

United States v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.

District Court, D. Delaware

Decided November 29, 1950No. Civ. No. 1216PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LEAHY, Chief Judge.

The incident of getting an antitrust case to- trial has recently been narrated. The problem [“Prolonged proceedings and a massive record are almost inevitable if an antitrust controversy is carried to court; for the rules of law that have been developed, with respect to both the offense and the proof which may be adduced, generally permit the entire history of a major company or industry to be placed in issue.”] has been explored and examined as to procedures that have and have not been utilized in the courts, by McAllister1 in a recent essay which contains excellent notes…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Swift & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
  2. Schine Chain Theatres, Inc. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  3. Pfotzer v. Aqua System, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
  4. United States v. General Electric Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1949
  5. United States v. Vehicular Parking, Ltd.District Court, D. Delaware · 1943

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1980
  2. United States v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1978
  3. City of Cleveland v. Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1981
  4. Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1966

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API