From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schwing Motor Company v. Hudson Sales Corp.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Dec 17, 1956
239 F.2d 176 (4th Cir. 1956)

Opinion

Nos. 7220, 7221.

Argued November 8, 1956.

Decided December 17, 1956.

Wilson K. Barnes, Baltimore, Md. (D. Sylvan Friedman, Baltimore, Md., on the brief), for appellants.

William L. Marbury and Roger A. Clapp, Baltimore, Md. (John Martin Jones, Jr., Baltimore, Md., Richard W. Larwin, Detroit, Mich., John S. Stanley, Baltimore, Md., and Hershey, Donaldson, Williams Stanley Baltimore, Md., on the brief), for appellees.

Before PARKER, Chief Judge, and SOPER and SOBELOFF, Circuit Judges.


These are appeals from orders dismissing on the pleadings actions by two local automobile dealers to recover damages under the Sherman and Clayton antitrust acts from an automobile manufacturer's sales corporation and a local dealer to whom an exclusive dealership or agency had been granted. The plaintiffs had formerly held dealership contracts with the sales corporation of the manufacturer for dealing in the make of automobiles in question; but there is no claim of right to recover damages on account of breach of contract; and there is no allegation or contention that the exclusive dealership was a part of or incidental to any conspiracy or agreement to monopolize or restrain trade between manufacturers or wholesale dealers. The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the District Judge and we agree with him that no violation of the Sherman or Clayton Acts, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1- 7, 12 et seq., 15 note is alleged for reasons adequately stated in his opinion, which is adopted as the opinion of this court. See Schwing Motor Co. v. Hudson Sales Corporation, D.C., 138 F. Supp. 899.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Schwing Motor Company v. Hudson Sales Corp.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Dec 17, 1956
239 F.2d 176 (4th Cir. 1956)
Case details for

Schwing Motor Company v. Hudson Sales Corp.

Case Details

Full title:SCHWING MOTOR COMPANY, Incorporated, a Maryland Corporation, Appellant, v…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Dec 17, 1956

Citations

239 F.2d 176 (4th Cir. 1956)

Citing Cases

Miller Motors v. Ford Motor Company

However, as the Supreme Court noted in United States v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours Co., 351 U.S. 377, 393, 76…

Packard Motor Car Co. v. Webster Motor Car

We think the defendants were entitled to judgment. We agree substantially with Schwing Motor Co. v. Hudson…