Dickerson v. New Banner Inst., Inc., 455 U.S. 1015 (1982). · Go Syfert
Search
Dickerson v. New Banner Inst., Inc., 455 U.S. 1015 (1982). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case · “And we see no reason to expand judicially the scope of § 1 of the Sherman Act to accommodate a claim that is already cognizable under another antitrust provision — § 7 of the Clayton Act ... ”
70 citation events (4 in the last 25 years) across 25 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Sofa Gallery, Inc. v. Mohasco Upholstered Furniture Corp. (mnd, 1986-07-09) · Strongest negative: United States v. Jeffery Paul Gray (ca5, 1982-11-12)
Treatment trajectory · 1982 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1982 2004 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "but see" United States v. Jeffery Paul Gray
5th Cir. · 1982 · signal: but cf. · confidence high
See United States v. Bergeman, 592 F.2d 533, 535-37 (9th Cir. 1979) (Idaho statute similar to § 42.12); United States v. Herrell, 588 F.2d 711, 713 (9th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 964 , 99 S.Ct. 1511 , 59 L.Ed.2d 778 (1979) (Arizona statute provides that the expunged conviction can be proved in any subsequent prosecution); United States v. Potts, 528 F.2d 883, 885 (9th Cir. 1975) (Washington statute similar to Arizona’s); United States v. Kelly, 519 F.2d 794, 796 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 926 , 96 S.Ct. 272 , 46 L.Ed.2d 254 (1975) (Minnesota statute similar to Arizona’s);…
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Sofa Gallery, Inc. v. Mohasco Upholstered Furniture Corp.
D. Minnesota · 1986 · signal: see, e.g. · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
and we see no reason to expand judicially the scope of 1 of the sherman act to accommodate a claim that is already cognizable under another antitrust provision - 7 of the clayton act ...
discussed Cited "see" Joblove, Allied Servs. v. Barr Labs. Inc.
2d Cir. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Valley Drug, 344 F.3d at 1306 (“[T]he reasonableness of agreements under the antitrust laws are to be judged at the time the agreements are entered into.”) (citing, inter alia, SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195, 1207 (2d Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982)).
discussed Cited "see" Joblove v. Barr Labs. Inc.
2d Cir. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Valley Drug, 344 F.3d at 1306 (“[TJhe reasonableness of agreements under the antitrust laws are to be judged at the time the agreements are entered into.”) (citing, inter alia, SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195, 1207 (2d Cir.1981), cert, denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982)).
discussed Cited "see" In Re Tamoxifen Citrate Antitrust Litigation
2d Cir. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Valley Drug, 344 F.3d at 1306 ("[T]he reasonableness of agreements under the antitrust laws are to be judged at the time the agreements are entered into.") (citing, inter alia, SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195, 1207 (2d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982)). 49 As the plaintiffs correctly point out, the Federal Circuit would have reviewed Judge Broderick's factual findings underlying his conclusion of invalidity with considerable deference, rather than engaging in a presumption of validity.
discussed Cited "see" Axis, S.P.A. v. Micafil, Inc.
6th Cir. · 1989 · signal: see · confidence high
See SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195 (2d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Kobe, Inc. v. Dempsey Pump Co., 198 F.2d 416 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 344 U.S. 837 , 73 S.Ct. 46 , 97 L.Ed. 651 (1952).
cited Cited "see" International Wood Processors, a Corporation, and John C. Olsen v. Power Dry, Inc., a Corporation, Power Dry Patent, Inc., a Corporation, Drywood Corporation, a Corporation, Compton & Cloer Lumber Company, a Corporation, General Wood Processors, Inc., a Corporation, European Banking Company, Limited, a United Kingdom Company, K.N. Hronopoulos, an Individual, Delano Compton, an Individual, and Arthur J. Crowley, an Individual, International Wood Processors, a Corporation, and John C. Olsen v. Power Dry, Inc., a Corporation, Power Dry Patent, Inc., a Corporation, Compton & Cloer Lumber Company, a Corporation, General Wood Processors, Inc., a Corporation, Delano Compton, an Individual, and Drywood Corporation, a Corporation, European Banking Company Limited, a United Kingdom Company, K.N. Hronopoulos, an Individual, Arthur J. Crowley, an Individual, International Wood Processors, a Corporation, and John C. Olsen v. Power Dry, Inc., a Corporation, Power Dry Patent, Inc., a Corporation, Drywood Corporation, a Corporation, Compton & Cloer Lumber Company, a Corporation, General Wood Processors, Inc., a Corporation, K.N. Hronopoulos, an Individual, Delano Compton, an Individual, Arthur J. Crowley, an Individual, and European Banking Company Limited, a United Kingdom Company, International Wood Processors, a Corporation, and John C. Olsen v. Power Dry, Inc., a Corporation, Power Dry Patent, Inc., a Corporation, Drywood Corporation, a Corporation, Compton & Cloer Lumber Company, a Corporation, General Wood Processors, Inc., a Corporation, European Banking Company Limited, a United Kingdom Company, K.N. Hronopoulos, an Individual, Delano Compton, an Individual, Arthur J. Crowley, an Individual, International Wood Processors, a Corporation, John C. Olsen v. European Banking Company Limited, a United Kingdom Company, and Power Dry, Inc., a Corporation, Power Dry Patent, Inc., a Corporation, Drywood Corporation, a Corporation, Compton & Cloer Lumber Company, a Corporation, General Wood Processors, Inc., a Corporation, K.N. Hronopoulos, an Individual, Delano Compton, an Individual, Arthur J. Crowley, an Individual, International Wood Processors, a Corporation, John C. Olsen v. Arthur J. Crowley, an Individual, and Power Dry, Inc., a Corporation, Power Dry Patent, Inc., a Corporation, Drywood Corporation, a Corporation, Compton & Cloer Lumber Company, a Corporation, General Wood Processors, Inc., a Corporation, European Banking Company Limited, a United Kingdom Company, K.N. Hronopoulos, an Individual, Delano Compton, an Individual
4th Cir. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195, 1203 (2d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982).
cited Cited "see" International Wood Processors v. Power Dry, Inc.
4th Cir. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195, 1203 (2d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982).
cited Cited "see" William F. BELL, Appellant, v. William F. BOLGER, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Appellee
8th Cir. · 1983 · signal: see · confidence high
See 455 U.S. 1015 , 102 S.Ct. 1707 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982).
cited Cited "see" Dale v. Bartels
S.D.N.Y. · 1982 · signal: see · confidence high
See 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Midwestern MacHinery Co., Inc. v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.
D. Minnesota · 1998 · signal: see also · confidence low
See du Pont, 353 U.S. at 607 ; SCFC ILC, 801 F.Supp. at 525 ; see also International Railways of Central America v. United Brands Co., 532 F.2d 231 (2d Cir.1976) (recognizing a use of stock to impose section 7 damage liability), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 835 , 97 S.Ct. 101 , 50 L.Ed.2d 100 (1976) SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 463 F.Supp. 983 (D.Conn.1978) (analyzing “holding” theory and determining that an impermissible use must be involved), affirmed and remanded on other grounds, 645 F.2d 1195 (2d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Dickerson, Director, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
v.
New Banner Institute, Inc.
No. 81-1180.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 22, 1982.
455 U.S. 1015
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 66%
Citer courts: D. Minnesota (1)

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari granted.