1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 387 F.2d
  5. 387 F.2d 94 (1967)
 

STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. MORTON SALT COMPANY

Nos. 16397-16399 and 16517-16519.

387 F.2d 94 (1967)

The STATE OF NEW JERSEY, on Behalf of Itself and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff-Appellant, and County of Bergen, a Body Politic and Corporate of the State of New Jersey, Intervening Plaintiff-Appellant, and New Jersey Highway Authority, Intervening Plaintiff-Appellant, and New Jersey Turnpike Authority, Intervening Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MORTON SALT COMPANY, an Illinois Corp. et al., Defendants-Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.

Decided December 8, 1967.

Rehearings Denied January 22, 1968.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Prospero DeBona, Milton, Keane & DeBona, Jersey City, N. J. (Arthur J. Sills, Atty. Gen., of New Jersey, Frank J. Cuccio, County Counsel, Jersey City, N. J., Pindar, McElroy, Connell & Foley, Newark, N. J., Joseph R. Postizzi, New Brunswick, N. J., on the brief), for State of New Jersey and New Jersey Highway Authority, and others.

Lewis Van Dusen, Jr., Drinker, Biddle & Reath, Philadelphia, Pa. (Howard F. Ordman, New York City, Stephen F. Lichtenstein, Trenton, N. J., Morris R. Brooke, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellee International Salt Co.

Donald Brown, Fox, Rothschild, O'Brien & Frankel, Philadelphia, Pa. (Orlando & Cummins, Camden, N. J., Edward Gerald Donnelly, Jr., Israel Packel, Daniel Lowenthal, Philadelphia, Pa., George H. Hohweiler, Samuel P. Orlando, Camden, N. J., on the brief, for appellee, Cayuga Rock Salt Co.

Bruce D. Shoulson, Lowenstein & Spicer, Newark, N. J. (Murry D. Brochin, Newark, N. J., on the brief), for appellee, Winans Carter Corp., and others.

Before HASTIE, FREEDMAN and SEITZ, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

SEITZ, Circuit Judge.

On June 28, 1965, the State of New Jersey instituted in the district court a private antitrust class action against seven corporations seeking treble damages and other appropriate relief because of their alleged violations of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 1 and 2). Several parties were permitted to intervene as plaintiffs. The district court thereafter granted the partial summary judgment...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases