U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 1958

Niagara of Buffalo, Inc. v. Niagara Manufacturing and Distributing Corporation-Respondent

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Decided December 31, 1958 · Swan, Medina, Waterman

262 F.2d 106; 1 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 34; 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5870; 1958 Trade Cas. (CCH) 69,228 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Borins & Snitzer, Buffalo, N. Y., for plaintiff-appellant., Jaeckle, Fleischmann, Kelly, Swart & Augspurger, Buffalo, N. Y., for defendant-respondent. John B. Walsh, Adelbert Fleischmann and Manly Fleischmann, Buffalo, N. Y., of counsel.

Cases that cite this one

9 later published cases cite this decision.

Cold Guard Corp. v. Republic Aluminum Co. (District Court, S.D. New York 1965)
Walker Distributing Company v. Lucky Lager Brewing Company (9th Cir. 1963)
Sam S. Goldstein Industries, Inc. v. Botany Industries, Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 1969)
Chicago Title Insurance v. Great Western Financial Corp. (Cal. 1968)
Aerojet-General Corp. v. Aero-Jet Products Corp. (District Court, N.D. Ohio 1963)
Paul M. Harrod Company v. AB Dick Company (District Court, N.D. Ohio 1962)
Ideal Pictures Inc. v. Films Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 1961)
United States v. Irving Bitz (2d Cir. 1960)
David v. Sinclair Refining Co. (District Court, S.D. New York 1960)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an action under 15 U.S.C.A. § 15 to recover treble damages for alleged violations of the anti-trust laws. Defendant moved under Rule 12(b), Fed. Rules Civ.Proc. 28 U.S.C.A. to dismiss each count of the amended complaint for failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The motion was granted and the complaint dismissed.

In his opinion, reported in 161 F.Supp. 849, at page 850, the District Judge stated:

“ * * * Preparation of a proper pleading for an anti-trust suit requires a statement of matters and their relation to each other considerably more extensive than in a simple pleading in negligence or on contract.

“* * * the complaint herein might possibly be sufficient in the ordinary commercial case, but it does not allege the acts complained of with sufficient specificity to be a proper complaint in this type of case

This view of the requisites of a complaint in anti-trust cases is incorrect. Nagler v. Admiral Corporation, 2 Cir., 248 F.2d 319. The motion should have been denied.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.