Legal Opinion

United States v. Firestone Tire and Rubber Co.

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided January 10, 1974No. C73-836PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BATTISTI, Chief Judge.

In this civil antitrust suit, the Government charges that from about 1959 to date defendant Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, an Ohio corporation, has engaged in numerous activities designed to secure a monopoly in the manufacture and sale of replacement tires, in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2, and has made certain corporate acquisitions between 1959 and 1967 violative of Section 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18.

Defendant, in its answer, has interposed as a “First Affirmative Defense”: “Plaintiff is not entitled to…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. Times-Picayune Publishing Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
  3. United States v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
  4. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1953
  5. United States v. Georgia-Pacific CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Federal Deposit Insurance v. BerryDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1987
  2. United States v. De BeradinisDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1975
  3. Frisby v. Keith D. Weiner & Associates Co., LPADistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2009
  4. Pierce v. Apple Valley, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1984
  5. Morrow v. SouthDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1982

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

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

Powered by the Exa API