The Federal Antitrust Laws with AmendmentsU.S. Government Printing Office, 1923 - 182 páginas |
Dentro del libro
Resultados 1-5 de 20
Página 63
... handed down on June 4 , 1891 , the court held the combination to be in violation of the antitrust law and enjoined the further carrying out of the agreement . A decree to that effect was entered June 17 , 1891 . United States v ...
... handed down on June 4 , 1891 , the court held the combination to be in violation of the antitrust law and enjoined the further carrying out of the agreement . A decree to that effect was entered June 17 , 1891 . United States v ...
Página 76
... handed down by the Circuit Court adjudging that defendants were joined in a combination in restraint of trade through the instru- mentality of the Temple Iron Co. , but dismissing the charge of the petition as to the so - called 65 per ...
... handed down by the Circuit Court adjudging that defendants were joined in a combination in restraint of trade through the instru- mentality of the Temple Iron Co. , but dismissing the charge of the petition as to the so - called 65 per ...
Página 79
... handed down a decision reversing the lower court on December 2 , 1912 . A final decree dissolving the combination was entered . at St. Paul , Minn . , on June 30 , 1913 . United States v . E. J. Ray et al . Indictment returned February ...
... handed down a decision reversing the lower court on December 2 , 1912 . A final decree dissolving the combination was entered . at St. Paul , Minn . , on June 30 , 1913 . United States v . E. J. Ray et al . Indictment returned February ...
Página 83
... handed down February 11 , 1913 , and after much consideration as to how to dissolve the combination the court entered a final decree on February 13 , 1915 . United States v . Chicago Butter & Egg Board . Petition filed June 13 , 1910 ...
... handed down February 11 , 1913 , and after much consideration as to how to dissolve the combination the court entered a final decree on February 13 , 1915 . United States v . Chicago Butter & Egg Board . Petition filed June 13 , 1910 ...
Página 86
... handed down by the lower court on October 13 , 1914. On appeal , the Supreme Court , while reversing the decree below , refused to decide the questions in issue on the ground that the European war had rendered them moot . United States ...
... handed down by the lower court on October 13 , 1914. On appeal , the Supreme Court , while reversing the decree below , refused to decide the questions in issue on the ground that the European war had rendered them moot . United States ...
Otras ediciones - Ver todas
Términos y frases comunes
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 imposed Indictment returned Indictment returned June individual defendants jobbers June 29 lumber monopolize interstate trade Nolle prosequi entered nolo contendere Northern November October October 17 Peti Petition filed Petition filed December Petition filed February Petition filed July 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
Pasajes populares
Página 1 - An act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies...
Página 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.
Página 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.
Página 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.
Página 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...
Página 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...
Página 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...
Página 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...
Página 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.
Página 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.