Occidental Petroleum Corporation v. Buttes Gas & Oil Company
| Decision Date | 23 June 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 71-1984.,71-1984. |
| Citation | 461 F.2d 1261 |
| Parties | OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION and Occidental of UMM Al Qaywayn, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BUTTES GAS & OIL COMPANY et al., Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Philip F. Westbrook, Jr. (argued), Donald M. Wessling, of O'Melveny & Meyers, Los Angeles, Cal., Arthur Groman, of Mitchell, Silberberg & Knupp, Los Angeles, Cal., Louis Nizer, David G. Miller, of Phillips, Nizer, Benjamin, Krim & Ballon, New York City, for plaintiffs-appellants.
Frank Rothman (argued), Thomas H. Kuchel, Wyman, Bautzer, Finell, Rothman & Kuchel, Hindin, McKittrick & Marsh, Beverly Hills, Cal., E. David Philley, Houston, Tex., for defendants-appellees.
Before KOELSCH, CARTER and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges.
Appellants filed a private antitrust action against Buttes Gas & Oil Company, Clayco Petroleum Corporation and certain officers of Buttes and Clayco.
The district court dismissed the action as to Clayco and its officer, 331 F.Supp. 92 (1971) and no appeal has been brought from that dismissal.
Buttes urged five substantive grounds for dismissal. The district court, in an extensive and well-researched opinion, rejected all but one — the act of state doctrine. Id. Appellants now urge that the order dismissing the complaint should be reversed.
The dismissal was correct. We affirm for the reasons stated in the district court's opinion. Id. We need not consider whether dismissal would have been appropriate for any of the other reasons urged.
The judgment is affirmed.1
1 We note two cases which the Supreme Court has decided during the pendency of this appeal.
In California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited, 404 U.S. 508, 92 S.Ct. 609, 30 L.Ed.2d 642 (Jan. 13, 1972) the court held that a combination to harass and deter others from having free and unlimited access to agencies and the courts may constitute a violation of the antitrust laws. While the decision is pertinent to one of the other grounds for dismissal urged by Buttes, it has little bearing on the act of state doctrine.
First National City Bank v. Banco Nacional de Cuba, 406 U.S. 759, 92 S.Ct. 1808, 32 L.Ed.2d 466 (1972), involved a suit arising out of the Cuban government's expropriation of American-owned property. While there is no majority opinion, five members held that the act of state doctrine did not apply under the circumstances of that case. The decision, nevertheless, is limited to the facts of that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Athletes Foot of Delaware v. Ralph Libonati Co.
...... ATHLETES FOOT OF DELAWARE, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Sport Shoe of Newark, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Harold ..., Wilmington, Del., for defendants Ralph Libonati Company, Inc., Libco, Inc. and Ralph Libonati. . ... See also Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. Buttes Gas & Oil Co., 331 F.Supp. 92 ......
-
Sharon v. Time, Inc.
......Organization 599 F. Supp. 547 of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, 649 F.2d 1354 (9th Cir.1981), cert. ... 649 F.2d at 1358-59; see also Occidental of Umm al Qaywayn, Inc. v. A Certain Cargo of Petroleum ... and justified than in Lord Wilberforce's opinion in Buttes Gas and Oil Co. v. Hammer, 3 W.L.R. 787 (1981). Finding ......
-
DeRoburt v. Gannett Co., Inc., Civ. No. 78-0375.
...v. Bank of Am. Nat'l Trust & Sav. Ass'n, 549 F.2d 597 (9th Cir. 1976) (act of state argument rejected); Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. Buttes Gas & Oil Co., 461 F.2d 1261 (9th Cir. 1972), aff'g, 331 F.Supp. 92 (C.D.Ca. 1971), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 950, 93 S.Ct. 272, 34 L.Ed.2d 221 (1972) (a......
-
Caribe Trailer Systems v. Puerto Rico Maritime
......("Caribe") is a Puerto Rico corporation with its principal place of business in Washington, D. C. ...("McLean"). McLean is a holding company which in turn is wholly owned by defendant R. J. Reynolds ...1973); Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. Buttes Gas & Oil Corp., 331 F.Supp. 92, ......
-
EXPLORING THE INDISPENSABLE PARTY: A SURVEY OF COMMON CONTEXTS FOR RULE 19 CLAIMS.
...committee's note (1966). (31) Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. Buttes Gas & Oil Co., 331 F. Supp. 92, 104 (C.D. Cal. 1971), aff'd, 461 F.2d 1261 (9th Cir. (32) Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. Tenn. Val. Auth., 340 F. Supp. 400, 408 (S.D.N.Y. 1971), rev'd on other grounds, 459 F.2d 255 (2d ......
-
Table of Cases
...So. 2d 1377 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987), 191 Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. Buttes Gas & Oil Co., 331 F. Supp. 92 (C.D. Cal. 1971), aff’d , 461 F.2d 1261 (9th Cir. 1972), 99, 100 Opdyke Inv. Co. v. City of Detroit, 883 F.2d 1265 (6th Cir. 1989), 98 Ottensmeyer v. Chesapeake & Potomac Tel. Co.......
-
Associations and Immunity for Government-Related Activities
...Buttes Gas & Oil Co., 331 F. Supp. 92, 107@08 (C.D. Cal. 1971) (declining to extend Noerr to petitioning of foreign governments), aff’d , 461 F.2d 1261 (9th Cir. 1972). 100 Antitrust and Associations Handbook First Amendment or also is based on implicit limitations on the scope of the Sherm......
-
Standard Setting by Governmental or Quasi-Governmental Bodies
...148. Id. at 453; see also Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. Buttes Gas & Oil, 331 F. Supp. 92, 107 (C.D. Cal. 1971), aff’d per curiam , 461 F.2d 1261 (9th Cir. 1972) (holding act of state doctrine barred plaintiff’s antitrust claims of a conspiracy with Sharjah and Iran to interfere with plaint......