Lapas attēli


[Volume 9]



1. Before Can Be Maintained for Duress, Must Be Rescission and
Offer to Return Money.-Where a minority stockholder was
compelled by duress of the controlling stockholders to sell
his stock to the majority holders, rescission and offer to
return the purchase money is necessary before he can sue
for the duress. Sullivan v. Associated Bill Posters, 272 F.
2. No Defense to Suit for Infringement that Publishers Have
Formed Unlawful Combination.-It is no defense to a suit
for infringement of copyright of musical selections that the
authors, composers, and publishers have formed an unlawful
combination, in violation of the Sherman Act, the remedies
under the act being clearly defined and exclusive. Harms v.
Cohen, 279 F. 280.


1. When Notice of, Will Be Presumed. In criminal as well as in
civil affairs, every man is presumed to know everything that
he can learn on inquiry, when he has facts in his possession
which suggest inquiry. U. S. v. American Federation of
Labor, 283 F. 493.

2. When Lawful Acts Become Unlawful.-Acts lawful in them-
selves take on an unlawful character, when they are so
interwoven with acts inherently criminal that the whole
plan must be condemned as a violation of the laws against
conspiracies in restraint of interstate commerce. U. S. v.
Railway Employees, 286 F. 234.



1. In Construing, Views of a Member of, Not To Be Resorted to.-
In construing an act of Congress, debates expressing views
and motives of individual Members may not be resorted to,
but reports of committees and explanatory statements in
the nature of a supplemental report made by the committee
member in charge of the bill in course of passage may.
Duplex Printing Press Co. v. Deering, 254 U. S. 474. 140


1. Action for Damages against Bill Posters, under Sherman Act,
Not Available for.-In an action for treble damages under
the Sherman Act, allegations that defendant, an association
of bill posters, refused to deal with lithographers furnishing
posters to other than members of the association, if mean-


ing anything more than that the members of the association would post bills only for advertisers sending their bills through its licensed solicitors, did not avail plaintiffs, who were solicitors of advertising, and not lithographers. Ramsay v. Associated Bill Posters, 271 F. 142. 174

2. Whose Interstate Business Damaged, May Sue Conspirators for Damages, under Sherman Act.-Solicitors of advertising for customers in many States, who prepared, designed, purchased and sold posters and caused them to be displayed by local billposters in many places throughout the Union and Canada, and whose business suffered from the abovementioned combination, were entitled to sue the alleged conspirators for triple damages under the Act. Ramsay Co. v. Associated Bill Posters, 260 U. S. 512.



1. Statement in Instructions, in Contempt Proceeding Tried to Jury, Held without Prejudice. In proceedings for contempt for violation of an injunction, where defendants were tried to a jury, a statement in the instructions that notice of the injunction has been published in the daily papers, though no proof of such fact was introduced, held not prejudicial, where defendants, though testifying in their own behalf, made no claim that they were ignorant of the injunction. Lyons v. U. S. Shipping Board, 278 F. 146. 533


1. Invalidity of Paragraph 1464 of, Does Not Affect Continued Operation of Paragraph 1456.-Paragraph 1456, Arizona Revised Statutes, 1913, making general provision for issuance of injunctions, is separable from paragraph 1464, supra, having been adopted by the Territory and continued by the State Constitution as a State law before paragraph 1464 was enacted as an amendment, and the unconstitutionality of the latter does not affect the continued operation of the former. Truax v. Corrigan, 257 U. S. 342. 422


1. Of Dealers in Linseed Oil, under “Open-Price Plan,” When Not in Restraint of Trade.-An association of dealers in linseed oil under so-called "open-price plan," with a bureau proposing to collect and furnish to the various members current quotations, record of sales, statistics as to stock on hand, crop conditions, and other information, with agreement by members to furnish information as to daily prices and to make no sudden change without notice, held, in absence of direct evidence of acts hurtful to trade, not a combination in restraint thereof contrary to the Sherman Act. U. S. v. American Linseed Co., 275 F. 942. 302



1. Posting of Bills on, Does Not Directly Affect Interstate Commerce. Assuming that the business of advertising solicitors in sending their customers' advertisements to be posted on billboards in various towns and cities throughout the country is, as between them and their customers, interstate commerce, after the posters arrive at destination, the posting of them by billposters is a purely local service, only incidentally affecting interstate commerce, and rules of an association of billposters, prohibiting its members from accepting work from solicitors not licensed by the association, regulating prices for bill posting and prohibiting licensed solicitors from employing other bill posters, do not violate Sherman Act. Ramsey Co. v. Associated Bill Posters, 271 F. 143. 175


1. When Jurisdiction Is Affirmatively Prima Facie Shown.-Where a bill contains appropriate jurisdictional allegations, showing diversity of citizenship and the requisite amount in controversy, jurisdiction is affirmatively shown prima facie, and the burden of proof on an issue joined thereon rests on the defendant. Auto Acetylene Light Co. v. Prest-O-Lite Co., 276 F. 539. 474

2. For Injunction, Multifarious, Where No Concert of Action Alleged. A bill against a number of labor organizations to enjoin alleged unlawful interference with complainant's property and business held multifarious, where no conspiracy or concert of action between defendants is alleged. U. S. v. Marine Engineers' Ass'n, 277 F. 834. 508 3. By One Steamboat Line against Another, Based on Pooling Contract, Subject to Demurrer.-In an action by one steamboat line against another to recover money alleged due under a pooling contract, on which the complaint was based, held, that a demurrer to the complaint should be sustained, the contract being void and in violation of the Sherman Law, the "rule of reason" being inapplicable to validate the agreement. Lee Line Steamers v. Memphis, etc., Packet Co., 277 487

F. 9.


1. Improper Prayer Does Not Justify Dismissal.-The fact that a bill contains a prayer for relief, which the court was without power to grant under the Clayton Act, does not require its dismissal, where, aside from those portions of the prayer, it charges a combination to commit unlawful acts unduly obstructing the course of trade. U. S. v. American Federation of Labor, 286 F. 231.



2. Same-Not To Be Dismissed on Ground It Is to Enjoin Commission of Crimes. Since both the Sherman Act and Clayton Act invest the District Courts with jurisdiction to restrain violation of those acts, a bill to restrain such violations will not be dismissed, on the ground that it is a bill to enjoin the commission of crimes. Ib.


3. Same-Not To Be Dismissed Because Strike Has Terminated.— A bill to enjoin a conspiracy to interfere with interstate commerce and the transportation of the mails by a strike of railroad employees will not be dismissed, merely because the strike had terminated on most of the railroads, in view of Clayton Act, section 5, making a decree in a proceeding in equity brought by the United States under the antitrust laws, to the effect that defendant has violated such laws, prima facie evidence against the defendant in any suit or proceeding brought another party against such defendant. Ib. 836 4. To Enjoin Restraint of Trade, Not To Be Dismissed Because Not Enforceable against Some Defendants.-A bill to enjoin a conspiracy in restraint of trade by striking railway employees will not be dismissed, where some of the defendants had submitted to the jurisdiction of the court and answered, merely because an injunction issued therein could not be enforced against other defendants, who were not inhabitants of the district. U. S. v. Railway Employees, 286 F. 231. 836 5. Decree Dismissing, for Want of Jurisdiction, Should Be without

Prejudice. A decree dismissing a bill for want of jurisdiction should be without prejudice. General Investment Co. v. Lake Shore & M. S. Ry. Co., 260 U. S. 288. 211

6. When Should Not Be Dismissed in District Court, for Lack of Jurisdiction.—A bill in the District Court setting up a claim of Federal right should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the claim is wanting in merit, if it be not wholly frivolous. Hart v. Keith Vaudeville Exchange, 262 U. S. 273. 706

7. Same-Bill for Injunction and Damages, Should Not Have Been Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction.-Plaintiff, by a bill brought before the decision of this court in Federal Base Ball Club v. National League, 259 U. S. 200, sought an injunction and damages, under the Sherman Act against an alleged conspiracy of theater owners and of corporations engaged, like himself, in the business of getting contracts for vaudeville actors to perform throughout the United States, and of acting as their manager and personal representative, alleging that the business involved contracts not only for travel of performers from State to State and from abroad, but also for transportation of vaudeville acts, including performers, scenery, music, costumes, etc., resulting in a

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »