1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 81 F.Supp.
  5. 81 F.Supp. 212 (1948)
 

BALL v. PARAMOUNT PICTURES, INC.

Civ. A. No. 2963.

81 F.Supp. 212 (1948)

BALL v. PARAMOUNT PICTURES, Inc. et al.

United States District Court W. D. Pennsylvania.

December 13, 1948.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Thorp, Bostwick, Reed & Armstrong, of Pittsburgh, Pa., and Rawle & Henderson, of Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiff.

Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis, of Philadelphia, Pa., and Smith, Buchanan & Ingersoll and Reed, Smith, Shaw & McClay, Esqs., all of Pittsburgh, Pa., for defendants.

GIBSON, Chief Judge.

And now, to wit, December 13, 1948, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed as follows:

1. The monopoly of exhibition of motion pictures on first run in the Borough of Ambridge, Pennsylvania, engaged in by the defendants and the conspiracies and attempts to bring about such monopoly and the contracts, combinations and agreements of the defendants, among themselves or with others, resulting in such monopoly and in the restraint of interstate...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases