Mt. Hood Stages, Inc., D/B/A Pacific Trailways v. The Greyhound Corporation and Greyhound Lines, Inc.

Ninth Circuit

Mt. Hood Stages, Inc., D/B/A Pacific Trailways v. The Greyhound Corporation and Greyhound Lines, Inc.

583 F.2d 469

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 7, 1978

Docket74-1282

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 583 F.2d 469 (Mt. Hood Stages, Inc., D/B/A Pacific Trailways v. The Greyhound Corporation and Greyhound Lines, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mt. Hood Stages, Inc., D/B/A Pacific Trailways v. The Greyhound Corporation and Greyhound Lines, Inc., 583 F.2d 469 (9th Cir. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

BROWNING, Circuit Judge.

Pursuant to mandate of the Supreme Court, Greyhound Corp. v. Mt. Hood Stages, Inc., - U.S. -, 98 S.Ct. 2370, 57 L.Ed.2d 239 (1978), this case has been remanded to us for resolution of appellee’s contention that the Clayton Act’s statute of limitations, 15 U.S.C. § 15b (1976 ed.), was tolled, under equitable principles.

We think it is appropriate to remand this case to the trial court to decide in the first instance whether the equitable tolling claim was raised at such a time and in such manner as to preserve that issue for decision by the trial court, and, if so, whether the statute of limitations was in fact equitably tolled. Cf. Poloron Products, Inc. v. Lybrand Ross Bros. & Montgomery, 534 F.2d 1012, 1018 (2d Cir. 1976); United States v. Fahrenkamp, 312 F.2d 627, 632 (8th Cir. 1963); Nuelsen v. Sorensen, 293 F.2d 454, 462 (9th Cir. 1961).

Both issues turn in large part upon questions of fact. Remand for consideration by the trial judge, who is fully familiar with the facts, should not occasion undue delay. Any appeal can be expedited.

Remanded..

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

BROWNING, Circuit Judge.

Pursuant to mandate of the Supreme Court, Greyhound Corp. v. Mt. Hood Stages, Inc., - U.S. -, 98 S.Ct. 2370, 57 L.Ed.2d 239 (1978), this case has been remanded to us for resolution of appellee’s contention that the Clayton Act’s statute of limitations, 15 U.S.C. § 15b (1976 ed.), was tolled, under equitable principles.

We think it is appropriate to remand this case to the trial court to decide in the first instance whether the equitable tolling claim was raised at such a time and in such manner as to preserve that issue for decision by the trial court, and, if so, whether the statute of limitations was in fact equitably tolled. Cf. Poloron Products, Inc. v. Lybrand Ross Bros. & Montgomery, 534 F.2d 1012, 1018 (2d Cir. 1976); United States v. Fahrenkamp, 312 F.2d 627, 632 (8th Cir. 1963); Nuelsen v. Sorensen, 293 F.2d 454, 462 (9th Cir. 1961).

Both issues turn in large part upon questions of fact. Remand for consideration by the trial judge, who is fully familiar with the facts, should not occasion undue delay. Any appeal can be expedited.

Remanded..

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

583 F.2d 469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mt-hood-stages-inc-dba-pacific-trailways-v-the-greyhound-corporation-ca9-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack