Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Massey-Ferguson Ltd. v. Intermountain Ford Tractor Sales Co.

325 F.2d 713

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1963-12-24
Topic
general

PER CURIAM. The question presented on this interlocutory appeal in an antitrust suit is whether the appellant Canadian corporation was, as the trial Court held, transacting business and found within the District of Utah, so as to be amenable to venue and process in that District, under Section 12 of the Clayton Act, 38 Stat. 738, 15 U.S.C. § 22. We agree with the trial Court that by reason of its interlocking and integrated control of “North American Operations," the appellant Canadian corporation was enabled to and did direct “the detailed activities of the American corporation, including the operation of company stores in both Utah and Idaho; * * ” and that it was, therefore, transacting business and found through its subsidiary within the District. Intermountain Ford Tractor Sales Company, a corporation et al. v. Massey-Ferguson Limited, a corporation et al., D.C., 210 F.Supp. 930, 939.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Massey-Ferguson Ltd. v. Intermountain Ford Tractor Sales Co.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
13 opinions
MASSEY-FERGUSON v. INTERMOUNTAIN FORD T. S.,325 F.2d 713(10th Cir. 1963)
MASSEY-FERGUSON LIMITED, a corporation, Appellant, v. INTERMOUNTAIN FORD
TRACTOR SALES COMPANY, a corporation, Cassia Equipment Co., a corporation,
Elliotts Inc., a corporation, Chisholm Brothers Farm Equipment Co., a
corporation and Charles W. Bullen, doing business as Bullen Farm Equipment
Company, Appellees.
No. 7278.
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.
December 24, 1963.
Rehearing Denied January 24, 1964.
Page 714
Dennis McCarthy, of Van Cott, Bagley, Cornwall McCarthy, Salt Lake City, Utah (L.R. Gardiner, Jr., Salt Lake City, Utah, and John F. Sonnett, New York City, and William T. Lifland, Princeton, N.J., of Cahill, Gordon, Reindel Ohl, New York City, with him on the brief) for appellant.

Joseph L. Alioto, San Francisco, Cal. (Daniel L. Berman, of Rawlings, Wallace, Roberts Black, Salt Lake City, Utah, with him on the brief), for appellees.
Before MURRAH, Chief Judge, and HILL and SETH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
The question presented on this interlocutory appeal in an antitrust suit is whether the appellant Canadian corporation was, as the trial Court held, transacting business and found within the District of Utah, so as to be amenable to venue and process in that District, under Section 12 of the Clayton Act,38 Stat. 738,15 U.S.C. § 22.

We agree with the trial Court that by reason of its interlocking and integrated control of "North American Operations," the appellant Canadian corporation was enabled to and did direct "the detailed activities of the American corporation, including the operation of company stores in both Utah and Idaho; * *" and that it was, therefore, transacting business and found through its subsidiary within the District. Intermountain Ford Tractor Sales Company, a corporation et al. v. Massey-Ferguson Limited, a corporation et al., D.C.,210 F. Supp. 930,939.

The judgment of the trial Court is affirmed.Page 857