L. Gilbert Cohen v. Time, Inc., and Life Circulation Co.

Eighth Circuit

L. Gilbert Cohen v. Time, Inc., and Life Circulation Co.

312 F.2d 747

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided February 12, 1963·No. 17133_1·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an action to recover treble damages under the Sherman and Clayton Anti-Trust Laws, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1, et seq., and 15 U.S.C.A. § 12 et seq. Plaintiff-appellant, who has appeared in the District Court and here pro se, claims that Time and Life were parties to a conspiracy among various publishers to allocate the sponsored circulations market to themselves.

Time and Life moved for summary judgment, basing their motion on interrogatories, depositions, correspondence' between the parties and affidavits of Time' and Life employees. Nothing was introduced in behalf of the appellant to counteract the showing by the appellees. In a cogent and carefully detailed opinion, the District Court fully demonstrated the non-existence of any genuine issue of fact and accordingly granted appellees’ motion. No purpose could be served in the reiteration here of the reasons given by the District Court and accordingly we affirm on the basis of its opinion, Cohen v. Curtis Pub. Co., D.C. 31 F.R.D. 569.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

This is an action to recover treble damages under the Sherman and Clayton Anti-Trust Laws, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1, et seq., and 15 U.S.C.A. § 12 et seq. Plaintiff-appellant, who has appeared in the District Court and here pro se, claims that Time and Life were parties to a conspiracy among various publishers to allocate the sponsored circulations market to themselves.

Time and Life moved for summary judgment, basing their motion on interrogatories, depositions, correspondence' between the parties and affidavits of Time' and Life employees. Nothing was introduced in behalf of the appellant to counteract the showing by the appellees. In a cogent and carefully detailed opinion, the District Court fully demonstrated the non-existence of any genuine issue of fact and accordingly granted appellees’ motion. No purpose could be served in the reiteration here of the reasons given by the District Court and accordingly we affirm on the basis of its opinion, Cohen v. Curtis Pub. Co., D.C. 31 F.R.D. 569.

L. Gilbert Cohen v. Time, Inc., and Life Circulation Co., 312 F.2d 747 (8th Cir. 1963).

Pincite

312 F.2d 747 (L. Gilbert Cohen v. Time, Inc., and Life Circulation Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related