Bailey's Bakery, Ltd. v. Cont'l Baking Co. & Love's Biscuit & Bread Co., Inc., 401 F.2d 182 (9th Cir. 1969). · Go Syfert
Search
Bailey's Bakery, Ltd. v. Cont'l Baking Co. & Love's Biscuit & Bread Co., Inc., 401 F.2d 182 (9th Cir. 1969). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
28 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 10 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Lawn King, Inc. (nj, 1980-07-31)
Treatment trajectory · 1969 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1969 1997 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" State v. Lawn King, Inc. (2×)
N.J. · 1980 · signal: see · confidence high
Sullivan, supra, § 139 at 392; Von Kalinowski, Antitrust Laws and Trade Regulation § 65.01[2](6) (vol. 16-H, Bender Business Organization Series); see Bailey’s Bakery, Ltd. v. Continental Baking Co., 235 F.Supp. 705, 721-722 (D.Hawaii 1964), aff’d o. b. 401 F.2d 182 (9 Cir. 1968), cert. den. 393 U.S. 1086 , 89 S.Ct. 874 , 21 L.Ed.2d 779 (1969) (per se rule was inapplicable in civil antitrust suit because no “pernicious effects” were demonstrated and the plaintiff failed to allege that the fixed price in any way prevented the retailer from handling defendant’s bread at a profit; nor…
discussed Cited "see" Burkhead v. Phillips Petroleum Company
N.D. Cal. · 1970 · signal: see · confidence high
See Bailey’s Bakery, Ltd. v. Continental Baking Company, 235 F.Supp. 705, 716-717 (D.Hawaii 1964) aff’d, 401 F.2d 182 (9th Cir. 1968) cert. den. 393 U.S. 1086 , 89 S.Ct. 874 , 21 L.Ed.2d 779 (1968) reh. den. 394 U.S. 967 , 89 S.Ct. 1304 , 22 L.Ed.2d 570 (1969).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." International Telephone & Telegraph Corp. v. General Telephone & Electronics Corp.
D. Haw. · 1972 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e. g., this court’s own pronouncement in Bailey’s Bakery, Ltd. v. Continental Baking Co., 235 F.Supp. 705, 717 (D.Haw.1964), aff’d 401 F.2d 182 (9 Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 1086 , 89 S.Ct. 874 , 21 L.Ed.2d 779 (1969). 148 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
BAILEY’S BAKERY, LTD., Appellant,
v.
CONTINENTAL BAKING COMPANY and Love’s Biscuit and Bread Co., Inc., Appellees
21163_1.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Feb 24, 1969.
401 F.2d 182
Maxwell Keith (argued), Harold Tomin, San Francisco, Cal., Kashiwa & Kashiwa, Honolulu, Hawaii, for appellant., John H. Schafer (argued), of Coving-ton & Burling, Robert J. Muth, Washington, D. C., Roy M. Anderson, Rye, N. Y., Smith, Wild, Beebe & Cades, Honolulu, Hawaii, for appellees.
Browning, Ely, Der Heydt.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

This is a private action for treble damages under the Clayton Act and the Sherman Act. The case was tried before a jury, which returned verdicts in favor of appellees.

Appellant urges numerous assignments of error, some 135 in all, a small number of which were actively pursued. We have examined the record and the briefs of the parties. Considering the record as a[*183] whole, we conclude that there was insufficient evidence that any loss which appellant sustained proximately resulted from illegal activity on the part of the appellees to justify submission of this issue to the jury.

The judgment is affirmed.