For Your Data Timberlane Lumber Co. V. Banking Concern Of America Instance Brief
September 04, 2019
Edit
Timberlane Lumber Co. v. Bank of America instance brief summary
549 F.2d 597 (1976)
CASE FACTS
One plaintiff sued defendants alleging violations of Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1 et seq. The conform involved application of American antitrust laws to activities inward about other country, including actions of unusual authorities officials. The district courtroom dismissed the activity nether the human activity of province doctrine in addition to for lack of dependent area affair jurisdiction. Three plaintiffs brought a variety tort activity against defendants, which the district courtroom dismissed on the dry reason of forum non conveniens. Plaintiffs appealed.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The courtroom reversed the dismissal of 1 plaintiff's antitrust suit, asset that the human activity of province doctrine did non need dismissal of the action. The courtroom vacated in addition to remanded the dismissal of the remaining plaintiffs' tort suit, asset that since the antitrust conform was revived, the district courtroom should re-evaluate its previous ruling.
***
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
549 F.2d 597 (1976)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Plaintiffs appealed an lodge of the USA District Court for the Northern District of California, which dismissed 1 plaintiff's antitrust conform alleging violations of the Sherman Act,15 U.S.C.S. § 1 et seq., nether the human activity of province doctrine in addition to dismissed the remaining plaintiffs' variety tort conform on the dry reason of forum non conveniens.CASE FACTS
One plaintiff sued defendants alleging violations of Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1 et seq. The conform involved application of American antitrust laws to activities inward about other country, including actions of unusual authorities officials. The district courtroom dismissed the activity nether the human activity of province doctrine in addition to for lack of dependent area affair jurisdiction. Three plaintiffs brought a variety tort activity against defendants, which the district courtroom dismissed on the dry reason of forum non conveniens. Plaintiffs appealed.
DISCUSSION
- The courtroom ruled that summary judgment was inappropriate since at that spot were issues of cloth fact to move resolved.
- The courtroom concluded the district courtroom erred inward dismissing the antitrust conform since it was clear the human activity of province doctrine did non need dismissal.
- There were numerous elements to move weighed inward this type of antitrust suit.
- The district courtroom had constitute exclusively that the restraint involved did non create a straight in addition to substantial resultant on American unusual commerce.
- That asset did non satisfy whatever of the required inquiries.
CONCLUSION
The courtroom reversed the dismissal of 1 plaintiff's antitrust suit, asset that the human activity of province doctrine did non need dismissal of the action. The courtroom vacated in addition to remanded the dismissal of the remaining plaintiffs' tort suit, asset that since the antitrust conform was revived, the district courtroom should re-evaluate its previous ruling.
***
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.