JOS. SCHLITZ BREWING CO.
v.
UNITED STATES ET AL.

U.S. | 1966-11-07
No. 486
Mr. Justice Harlan is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and would set the case for argument.
385 U.S. 37 Supreme Court of the United States (1966) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

The motion of Philip A. Ray et al., for leave to file a brief, as amici curiae, is granted.

The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.

Mr. Justice Harlan is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and would set the case for argument.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Ricchetti v. Meister Brau, Inc., 431 F.2d 1211 (9th Cir. 1970)
    …cannot, on this record, be said to be clearly erroneous. The judgment of the District Court is accordingly affirmed. . United States v. Jos. Schlitz Brewing Co., 253 F.Supp. 129 (N.D.Cal.1966) aff’d mem., Jos. Schlitz Brewing Co. v. United States, 385 U.S. 37, 87 S.Ct. 240, 17 L.Ed.2d 35 (1966), rehearing denied, 385 U.S. 1021, 87 S.Ct. 702, 17 L.Ed.2d 560 (1967). . Section 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18, provides in part: “No corporation engaged in commerce shall acquire, directly or indirectly,…
  • Nifty Foods Corp. v. The Great Atl. & Pac. TEA Co., Inc., 614 F.2d 832 (2d Cir. 1980)
    …Alloys Corp., 484 F. 2d 1237 (8th Cir. 1973) (relevant market includes a number of aluminum alloys, not only particular high-quality aluminum-beryllium alloy); United States v. Jos. Schlitz Brewing Co., 253 F.Supp. 129 (N.D. Cal.), aff’d per curiam, 385 U.S. 37, 87 S.Ct. 240, 17 L.Ed.2d 35, reh. denied, 385 U.S. 1021, 87 S.Ct. 702, 17 L.Ed.2d 560 (1966) (private label and “premium” beer are part of the same relevant market). . “[T]he decision of the seller to transfer his business from A to B is valid eve…
  • Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Atl. Richfield Co. & the Anaconda Co., 549 F.2d 289 (4th Cir. 1977)
    …rant theory). . United States v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 367 F.Supp. 1226, 1232 (C.D.Cal.1973), aff’d mem., 418 U.S. 906, 94 S.Ct. 3199, 41 L.Ed.2d 1154 (1974); United States v. Jos. Schlitz Brewing Co., 253 F.Supp. 129, 147 (N.D.Cal.), aff’d mem., 385 U.S. 37, 87 S.Ct. 240, 17 L.Ed.2d 35 (1966); Kennecott Copper Corp. v. FTC, 467 F. 2d 67, 77-78 n. 8 (10 Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 909, 94 S.Ct. 1617, 40 L.Ed.2d 114 (1974); Ekco Products Co. v. FTC, 347 F. 2d 745, 752-53 (7 Cir. 1965); United Stat…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw