1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 850 F.2d
  5. 850 F.2d 477 (1988)
 

HARKINS AMUSEMENT ENT. v. GENERAL CINEMA CORP.

Nos. 86-2553, 86-15046 and 87-1740.

850 F.2d 477 (1988)

HARKINS AMUSEMENT ENTERPRISES, INC.; Daniel E. Harkins, individually and dba Tower Plaza Cinema I and II, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. GENERAL CINEMA CORPORATION, Defendant, and The Harry Nace Company; United Artists Theatres, Inc.; American Multi-Cinema, Inc.; Paramount Pictures Corporation; Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation; Universal Film Exchanges, Inc.; Warner Bros. Distributing Corp.; Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.; Avco Embassy Pictures Corp.; Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc.; United Artists Corporation; Buena Vista Distributing Co., Inc., Defendants/Appellees. HARKINS AMUSEMENT ENTERPRISES, INC.; Daniel E. Harkins, individually and dba Tower Plaza Cinema I and II, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. GENERAL CINEMA CORPORATION, Defendant, and The Harry Nace Company; United Artists Theatres, Inc.; American Multi-Cinema, Inc.; United Artists Corporation, Defendants/Appellees. HARKINS AMUSEMENT ENTERPRISES, INC.; Daniel E. Harkins, individually and dba Tower Plaza Cinema I and II, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. GENERAL CINEMA CORPORATION, Defendant, and The Harry Nace Company; American Multi-Cinema, Inc.; United Artists Corporation, Defendants/Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Decided April 6, 1988.

As Amended April 19 and July 19, 1988.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Edwin Tobolowsky, N. Henry Simpson, Tobolowsky, Prager & Schlinger, Dallas, Tex., David N. Farren, Shimmel, Hill, Bishop & Gruender, P.C., Phoenix, Ariz., for plaintiffs-appellants.

John P. Frank, Lewis & Roca, Phoenix, Ariz., James L. Seal, Harry B. Swerdlow and Rosenfeld, Meyer & Susman, Beverly Hills, Cal., Joel Linzner, Khourie & Crew, San Francisco, Cal., David W. Dow, Mohr, Hackett, Pederson, Blakely, and Randolph, P.C., Phoenix, Ariz., for defendants-appellees.

Before CANBY and BOOCHEVER, Circuit Judges, and IDEMAN, District Judge.

BOOCHEVER, Circuit Judge:

Harkins Amusement Enterprises, Inc., and Daniel E. Harkins (Harkins) appeal district court judgments in favor of numerous antitrust defendants. This case involves an alleged agreement between certain motion picture exhibitors in the Phoenix, Arizona area regarding film licensing. Seven distributors are accused of cooperating in this conspiracy, resulting in competitive injury to Harkins, an independent exhibitor.

The United States...

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