Legal Opinion
Cilley v. United Shoe Machinery Co.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided January 31, 1913No. 6 (C. C. No. 27)PublishedCited by 4 opinions
At Law. Action by Harry E. Cilley against United Shoe Machinery Company. On demurrer to declaration.
1Opinion of the Court
COLT, Circuit Judge.
This case is now before the court on demurrer to the declaration.
The case is an action at'law brought under section 7 of the act of Congress of July 2, 1890, known as the Anti-Trust Act (26 Stat. 210, c. 647 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3202]).
Section 7 reads as follows:
“Sec. 7. Any person who shall he injured in his business or property by any other person or corporation by reason of anything forbidden or declared to be unlawful by this act may sue therefor in any Circuit Court of the United States in the district in which the defendant resides or is found, without respect…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Swift & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- United States v. American Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- United States v. American Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1910
- People's Tobacco Co. v. American Tobacco Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1909
3Cited by4 opinions
- Corey v. Independent Ice Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1913
- Louisiana Farmers' Protective Union, Inc. v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. of America, Inc.District Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1941
- Baran v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1918
- Strout v. United Shoe Machinery Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1913