Welch Grape Juice Co. v. Frey & Son, Inc.

Fourth Circuit

Welch Grape Juice Co. v. Frey & Son, Inc.

261 F. 68, 171 C.C.A. 664, 1919 U.S. App. LEXIS 1720

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJuly 16, 1919

DocketNo. 1561

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 261 F. 68 (Welch Grape Juice Co. v. Frey & Son, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Welch Grape Juice Co. v. Frey & Son, Inc., 261 F. 68, 171 C.C.A. 664, 1919 U.S. App. LEXIS 1720 (4th Cir. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

WOODS, Circuit Judge.

In this action for damages under the federal statutes forbidding combinations and discriminations in restraint of trade, on the first trial the verdict was for the defendant The judgment was reversed for error in the admission of testimony. 240 Fed. 114, 153 C. C. A. 150. The case is here again on a writ of error from a judgment on the second trial in favor of the plaintiff.

The vital question on which all others turn is whether the testimony, viewed most favorably to plaintiff, tended to prove an unlawful combination or unlawful discrimination against the plaintiff, to which defendant wras a party. The facts differ in no essential particular from those in the case of Cudahy Packing Co. v. Frey & Son, 261 Fed. 65, - C. C. A.-, decided this day, and for the reasons stated in the opinion in that case the judgment must be reversed.

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

WOODS, Circuit Judge.

In this action for damages under the federal statutes forbidding combinations and discriminations in restraint of trade, on the first trial the verdict was for the defendant The judgment was reversed for error in the admission of testimony. 240 Fed. 114, 153 C. C. A. 150. The case is here again on a writ of error from a judgment on the second trial in favor of the plaintiff.

The vital question on which all others turn is whether the testimony, viewed most favorably to plaintiff, tended to prove an unlawful combination or unlawful discrimination against the plaintiff, to which defendant wras a party. The facts differ in no essential particular from those in the case of Cudahy Packing Co. v. Frey & Son, 261 Fed. 65, - C. C. A.-, decided this day, and for the reasons stated in the opinion in that case the judgment must be reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 F. 68, 171 C.C.A. 664, 1919 U.S. App. LEXIS 1720, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/welch-grape-juice-co-v-frey-son-inc-ca4-1919.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack