Legal Opinion
In Re Nine West Shoes Antitrust Litigation
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided January 7, 2000No. 99 Civ. 0245 BDP LeadPublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
BARRINGTON D. PARKER, Jr., District Judge.
This is a civil antitrust class action brought under the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 15, et seq., seeking relief on behalf of consumers who purchased shoes made and distributed by Nine West Group, Inc. (“Nine West”). The complaint alleges a vertical and horizontal price-fixing conspiracy in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1. Before this Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and for failure to plead fraud with…
2Cases cited57 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of CarpentersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- In Re Currency Conversion Fee Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2003
- Hinds County, Miss. v. Wachovia Bank, NADistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2009
- In re Commodity Exchange, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2016
- In re London Silver Fixing, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 2016
- In Re Natural Gas Commodity LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2004
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.