Legal Opinion

McTamney v. Stolt Tankers & Terminals (Holdings), S.A.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided December 29, 1987No. 87-0177PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

LUDWIG, District Judge.

Defendants Stolt-Nielsen, Inc. and Stolt Tank Containers, Inc. move for judgment on the pleadings as to count III of the complaint.

This action claims violations by defendants 1 of section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2; section 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18; together with pendent state torts, Pennsylvania common law restraint of trade and interference with contractual relations. Only the Clayton Act count— count III — is challenged by defendants’ motion. Jurisdiction is federal question. 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

The complaint alleges: In January, 1986…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Bender v. Williamsport Area School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. United States v. ITT Continental Baking Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. United States v. Columbia Pictures CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1960
  5. United States v. City of PhiladelphiaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1979

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. United States of America Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Dairy Farmers of America, Inc. Southern Belle Dairy Co., LLCCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
  2. Fjord v. AMR Corp. (In re AMR Corp.)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 2014
  3. United States v. Dairy Farmers of AmCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API