FEDERAL · 15 U.S.C. · Chapter 1
District in which to sue corporation
15 U.S.C. § 22
Title15 — Commerce and Trade
Chapter1 — MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE
This text of 15 U.S.C. § 22 (District in which to sue corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
15 U.S.C. § 22.
Text
Any suit, action, or proceeding under the antitrust laws against a corporation may be brought not only in the judicial district whereof it is an inhabitant, but also in any district wherein it may be found or transacts business; and all process in such cases may be served in the district of which it is an inhabitant, or wherever it may be found.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Daniel v. American Board of Emergency Medicine
428 F.3d 408 (Second Circuit, 2005)
United States v. Swiss American Bank, Ltd.
191 F.3d 30 (First Circuit, 1999)
In re Potash Antitrust Litigation
159 F.R.D. 682 (D. Minnesota, 1995)
Goldlawr, Inc. v. Marcus Heiman, Select Operating Corporation and United Booking Office, Inc., and Milton Shubert, William Klein and Sylvia W. Golde
288 F.2d 579 (Second Circuit, 1961)
Sloan v. Gen. Motors LLC
287 F. Supp. 3d 840 (N.D. California, 2018)
Acoustic Systems, Inc. v. Wenger Corp.
207 F.3d 287 (Fifth Circuit, 2000)
Jaftex Corp. v. Randolph Mills, Inc.
282 F.2d 508 (Second Circuit, 1960)
The Welch Scientific Company v. The Human Engineering Institute, Inc.
416 F.2d 32 (Seventh Circuit, 1970)
Star Lines, Ltd. v. Puerto Rico Maritime Ship. A.
442 F. Supp. 1201 (S.D. New York, 1978)
O.S.C. Corporation and O.S.C. Corporation of California v. Toshiba America, Inc. And Tokyo Shibaura Electric Co., Ltd.
491 F.2d 1064 (Ninth Circuit, 1974)
B. J. Semel Associates, Inc., and B. J. Semel D/B/A South East Fire-Works v. United Fireworks Manufacturing Co., Inc.
355 F.2d 827 (D.C. Circuit, 1966)
Soares v. Roberts
417 F. Supp. 304 (D. Rhode Island, 1976)
DuPont Glore Forgan Inc. v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.
437 F. Supp. 1104 (S.D. New York, 1977)
Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co.
723 F.2d 238 (Third Circuit, 1983)
ECC CORPORATION v. Slater Electric, Inc.
336 F. Supp. 148 (E.D. New York, 1971)
Board Of County Commissioners Of The County Of Custer v. Wilshire Oil Company Of Texas
523 F.2d 125 (Tenth Circuit, 1975)
Massey-Ferguson Ltd. v. Intermountain Ford Tractor Sales Co.
325 F.2d 713 (Tenth Circuit, 1963)
Paul H. Aschkar & Company v. The Honorable Jesse W. Curtis
327 F.2d 306 (Ninth Circuit, 1964)
D'ANGELO v. Petroleos Mexicanos
398 F. Supp. 72 (D. Delaware, 1975)
Lower Colorado River Authority v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.
219 F. Supp. 743 (W.D. Texas, 1963)
Source Credit
History
(Oct. 15, 1914, ch. 323, §12, 38 Stat. 736.)
Editorial Notes
Editorial Notes
References in Text
The antitrust laws, referred to in text, are defined in section 12 of this title.
References in Text
The antitrust laws, referred to in text, are defined in section 12 of this title.
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
15 U.S.C. § 22, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/15/22.