Legal Opinion
Schwing Motor Company v. Hudson Sales Corporation
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided February 28, 1956No. Civ. A. 6362, 6363PublishedCited by 78 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THOMSEN, Chief Judge.
Defendants have moved to dismiss the amended complaints on the ground that they do not state claims upon which relief can be granted in these two action's, which are brought to recover treble damages under the ariti-trust laws, 15 U.S. C.A. §§ 1, 2, 15. Motions to dismiss the original complaints on the same ground were granted by Judge Coleman, with leave to amend. The principal question in each case is whether an agreement between an automobile manufacturer and a retail dealer, pursuant to which the manufacturer refuses to renew expiring agreements with two other…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, Appts. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- United States v. Colgate & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Times-Picayune Publishing Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Eastman Kodak Co. v. Southern Photo Materials Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Apex Hosiery Co. v. LeaderSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by78 opinions
- Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc. v. Hawaiian Oke & Liquors, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969
- Oreck Corporation v. Whirlpool Corporation and Sears, Roebuck & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
- Industrial Building Materials, Inc. v. Interchemical CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
- Packard Motor Car Company v. The Webster Motor Car Company, the Webster Motor Car Company v. Packard Motor Car CompanyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1957
- Cernuto, Inc. v. United Cabinet Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
73 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.