Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery Corporation
HANOVER SHOE, INC., Appellee, v. UNITED SHOE MACHINERY CORPORATION, Appellant
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
In this suit brought under Section 4 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 15 , for alleged injury resulting from claimed violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 2 , by defendant there was before the district court for trial as a separate issue the question of “Whether the excessive shoe machinery costs alleged by the plaintiff and denied by the defendant constituted an injury to plaintiff’s business or property.” The quoted from consented to order further provided that the determination of the separate issue would proceed on the assumption “that the violation of the law as alleged existed, and (2) that the excessive cost of machinery as alleged existed.” The sole defense to that assumed state of facts was that plaintiff passed along defendant’s excessive charges to its customers and therefore was not injured.
The district court in a thoroughly convincing opinion rejected the proposition advanced by defendant as contrary to the language and purpose of the governing law. Appellant also asserts that the trebled damages called for by Section 4 would result in a windfall to plaintiff. Congress, in line with its effort to eliminate the sort of monopolistic practice here revealed imposed this rigorous penalty. The assumed situation before the district court is scarcely to be called sui generis but if by any chance it should be so categoried "then any modification of Section 4 to fit the particular circumstances would be for the Congress.
■The order of the district court will be affirmed on the opinion of that court, D.C. M.D.Pa.1960, 185 F.Supp. 826 .
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 21 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- Philadelphia Housing Authority v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp.
- The Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery Corporation, the Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery Corporation
- Atlantic City Electric Company v. General Electric Company
- Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co.
- State Wholesale Grocers v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
- Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois
Most recent
- Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois
- International Association Of Heat And Frost Insulators And Asbestos Workers, Etc. v. United Contractors Association, Inc. Of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
- International Ass'n of Heat & Frost Insulators v. United Contractors Ass'n
- In re Coordinated Pretrial Proceedings in Western Liquid Asphalt Cases
- City & County of Denver v. American Oil Co.
- Philadelphia Housing Authority v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp.
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.