The Federal Antitrust Laws with Amendments |
From inside the book
Results 6-10 of 17
Page 34
... judges of said court , if there be three or more ; and if there be not more than two circuit judges , then before them and such district judge as they may select ; or , in case the full court shall not at any time be made up by reason ...
... judges of said court , if there be three or more ; and if there be not more than two circuit judges , then before them and such district judge as they may select ; or , in case the full court shall not at any time be made up by reason ...
Page 72
... judge or the three circuit judges had jurisdiction , a writ of prohibition was filed against the district judge , which was sustained by the Supreme Court . A final decree was entered by the circuit judges on January 29 , 1914. There ...
... judge or the three circuit judges had jurisdiction , a writ of prohibition was filed against the district judge , which was sustained by the Supreme Court . A final decree was entered by the circuit judges on January 29 , 1914. There ...
Page 80
... judge's charge to jury . The case was retried in the lower court and on June 1 , 1914 , a verdict of not guilty was returned . United States v . New York , New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company et al . Petition filed May 22 , 1908 ...
... judge's charge to jury . The case was retried in the lower court and on June 1 , 1914 , a verdict of not guilty was returned . United States v . New York , New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company et al . Petition filed May 22 , 1908 ...
Page 90
... judges , under the provisions of the Expediting Act , during October , 1914 . A decision adverse to the Government was handed down on June 3 , 1915 , and a decree dismissing the pe- tition was entered on September 10 , 1915. From this ...
... judges , under the provisions of the Expediting Act , during October , 1914 . A decision adverse to the Government was handed down on June 3 , 1915 , and a decree dismissing the pe- tition was entered on September 10 , 1915. From this ...
Page 91
... judges handed down opinions adverse to the Government . An appeal to the Supreme Court resulted in a decision affirming the decree of the District Court May 20 , 1918. Application by the Government for a rehearing was denied . 41 . 42 ...
... judges handed down opinions adverse to the Government . An appeal to the Supreme Court resulted in a decision affirming the decree of the District Court May 20 , 1918. Application by the Government for a rehearing was denied . 41 . 42 ...
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
alleged American association cement charging a combination charging defendants charging the defendants Chicago Circuit Court coal combination and conspiracy combination in restraint combining and conspiring commission Company conspiracy in restraint conspiring to restrain Court of Appeals December 16 decision decree granting decree was entered defendants with combining defendants with entering Demurrer Demurrer overruled dismissed District Court District of Illinois Eastern District enjoining February 11 final decree fines aggregating Government was handed Indictment returned Indictment returned June individual defendants jobbers June 29 lumber monopolize interstate trade nolle prosequi Nolle prosequi entered nolo contendere Northern November October October 17 Peti Petition filed December Petition filed February Petition filed July Petition filed March Railroad remaining defendants restrain and monopolize restrain interstate trade restraint of interstate restraint of trade selling Sherman Antitrust Act Southern District stockyard Supreme Court Terra Cotta tion filed trade and commerce United United States District unlawful violation York
Popular passages
Page 1 - An act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies...
Page 29 - It shall be the duty of the various district attorneys, under the direction of the Attorney General of the United States, to prosecute for the recovery of forfeitures.
Page 3 - That any person who shall be injured in his business or property by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws may sue therefor in any district court of the United States in the district in which the defendant resides or is found or has an agent, without respect to the amount in controversy, and shall recover threefold the damages by him sustained, and the cost of suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee.
Page 39 - The costs and expenses of such prosecution shall be paid out of the appropriation for the expenses of the courts of the United States.
Page 2 - That it shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, to lease or make a sale or contract for sale of goods, wares, merchandise, machinery, supplies, or other commodities, whether patented or unpatented...
Page 22 - ... in that respect and containing a notice of a hearing upon a day and at a place therein fixed at least thirty days after the service of said complaint. The person, partnership, or corporation so complained of shall have the right to appear at the place and time so fixed and show cause...
Page 28 - ... or who shall willfully destroy, mutilate, alter, or by any other means or device falsify the record of any such account, record, or memoranda, or who shall willfully neglect or fail to make full, true, and correct entries...
Page 2 - ... unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, either directly or indirectly, to discriminate in price between different purchasers of commodities of like grade and quality...
Page 26 - ... any documentary evidence of any corporation being investigated or proceeded against; and the commission shall have power to require by subprena the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of all such documentary evidence relating to any matter under investigation.
Page 27 - No person shall be excused from attending and testifying or from producing documentary evidence before the commission or in obedience to the subpoena of the commission on the ground or for the reason that the testimony or evidence, documentary or otherwise, required of him may tend to incriminate him or subject him to a penalty or forfeiture.