Legal Opinion
Hillside Amusement Co. v. Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided January 9, 1942PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BRIGHT, District Judge.
Plaintiff moves for an order limiting its examination before trial and postponing such examination until after it has had an opportunity to examine seven of the defendants. The defendants counter with a motion to postpone their examination until after the completion of their examination of plaintiff.
The action is to recover damages for an alleged violation of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1 et seq. and involves a complicated series of transactions between the several defendants in moving picture production, distribution and exhibition. The complaint was filed on…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Kenealy v. Texas Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1939
- Bough v. LeeDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1939
- Grauer v. Schenley Products Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1938
- Harry Von Tilzer Music Publishing Co. v. Leo Feist, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1941
3Cited by7 opinions
- Park & Tilford Distillers Corp. v. Distillers Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1956
- Caribbean Const. Corp. v. Kennedy Van Saun Mfg. & Eng. Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1952
- Zweifler v. Sleco Laces, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1950
- Keller-Dorian Colorfilm Corp. v. Eastman Kodak Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1949
- Mutual Finance Corp. v. SobolDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1946
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.