William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., Inc., No. 75--1570
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | Before BROWNING and CHOY; SKOPIL |
| Citation | 526 F.2d 86 |
| Parties | 1975-2 Trade Cases 60,634 WILLIAM INGLIS & SONS BAKING CO., a corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING CO., INC., et al., Defendants-Appellees. |
| Docket Number | No. 75--1570 |
| Decision Date | 28 November 1975 |
Page 86
v.
ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING CO., INC., et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Ninth Circuit.
Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc
Denied March 12, 1976.
Eugene C. Crew (argued), of Broad, Khourie & Schultz, Professional Corp., San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant.
Charles E. Buffon (argued), of Covington & Burling, Washington, D.C., John T. Cusack (argued), of Gardner, Carton & Douglas, Chicago, Ill., Richard J. Archer (argued), of Sullivan, Jones &
Page 87
Archer, San Francisco, Cal., for defendants-appellees.Before BROWNING and CHOY, Circuit Judges, and SKOPIL, * District Judge.
SKOPIL, District Judge:
In 1971 William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. (Inglis) and four other wholesale baking companies filed this antitrust action against various competitors within relevant geographic markets in Washington, Oregon, and California. The complaint charged violations of §§ 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 and 2; § 2(a) of the Robinson-Patman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 13(a); §§ 3 and 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 14 and 18; and applicable state laws, including § 17000 et seq. of the California Unfair Practices Act (UPA), Cal.Bus. & Prof.Code § 17000 et seq.
In 1974 Inglis moved for a preliminary injunction in the Northern California market against five of the defendants: ITT Continental Baking Co., Inc., American Bakeries Company, Rainbo Baking Co. of Sacramento Valley, Kilpatrick's Bakeries, Inc., and San Joaquin Bakeries, Inc. The latter three defendants are subsidiaries of defendant Campbell Taggart, Inc. The preliminary injunction sought involved only alleged violations of § 2(a) of the Robinson-Patman Act and § 17000 et seq. of the California UPA.
The district court conducted extensive hearings on the motion, reviewed voluminous briefs submitted by the parties, and ordered preparation of cost studies by the defendants. On January 21, 1975, the court issued a memorandum opinion and order denying issuance of the preliminary injunction requested by Inglis. William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., Inc., 389 F.Supp. 1334 (N.D.Cal.1975). Plaintiff appeals from that denial pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). We vacate and remand.
Our disposition of this case makes a detailed discussion of the facts unnecessary. Basically, plaintiff contends that the defendants are guilty of discriminatory and below-cost pricing of their 'private label' bread products. 1 As one of their defenses to these allegations, defendants assert that their bread prices were established in a good faith effort to meet competition. The meeting competition defense is a statutory defense to violations of both § 2(a) of the Robinson-Patman Act and the UPA. 2
The district court stated that a plaintiff is entitled to a preliminary injunction only if the court finds that (1) the plaintiff will suffer irreparable injury if injunctive relief is not granted, (2) the plaintiff will probably prevail on the merits, (3) in balancing the equities, the defendants will not be harmed more than plaintiff is helped by the injunction, and (4) granting the injunction is in the public interest. See Sierra Club v. Hickel, 433 F.2d 24, 33 (9th Cir. 1970), aff'd, 405 U.S. 727, 92 S.Ct. 1361, 31 L.Ed.2d 636 (1972); C. Tennant & Sons, Inc. v. New York Terminal Conference, 299
Page 88
F.Supp. 796, 798--799 (S.D.N.Y.1969). The district court denied the injunction sought in this case because of its'serious reservations as to the probability...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
American Motorcyclist Ass'n v. Watt, No. CV 80-5561-AWT
...cert. dismissed, 441 U.S. 937, 99 S.Ct. 2065, 60 L.Ed.2d 667 (1979); William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 526 F.2d 86, 88 (9th Cir. 1975). The plaintiff must make some showing of irreparable harm6 to satisfy either alternative and at "least a minimal tip in the ba......
-
Orantes-Hernandez v. Smith, No. CV 82-1107-Kn.
...the plaintiffs; and (4) granting the injunction is in the public interest. William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 526 F.2d 86, 87 (9th Cir. 1975). Alternatively, plaintiffs may prevail upon a showing (1) that serious questions are raised, and (2) that the balance of......
-
McCarthy v. Cortland Cty. Community Action, No. 79-CV-740.
...(2d Cir. 1978). The Ninth Circuit has adopted a similar mode of analysis. William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 526 F.2d 86, 88 (9th Cir. 1975). However, in Berg v. Richmond Unified School District, supra, it held that Title VII's usual exhaustion requirements coul......
-
Westlands Water Dist. v. Patterson, No. CV-F-94-5217 OWW.
...the injunction. Landi v. Phelps, 740 F.2d 710, 712 (9th Cir. 1984), citing William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 526 F.2d 86, 87 (9th Cir.1975); or second, by ... either a combination of probable success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury or th......
-
Bracco v. Lackner, Civ. A. No. C-78-0471SAW.
...and demonstrate a balance of hardships tipping sharply in their favor. William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 526 F.2d 86 (9th Cir. 1975). Plaintiffs have raised such questions and demonstrated the requisite Reclassification Plaintiffs claim that the Department has ......
-
United States v. State of Washington, Civ. No. 9213—Phase I.
...that the balance of hardships tips sharply in their favor. See, William Inglis and Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 526 F.2d 86 (9th Cir. For the reasons hereinabove stated, unless and until this court orders otherwise, it is now hereby ORDERED as follows: Preliminary Injuncti......
-
Martin v. International Olympic Committee, 84-5859
...the injunction, and (4) granting the injunction is in the public interest. William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 526 F.2d 86, 87 (9th Cir.1975). Alternatively, a court may issue a preliminary injunction if the moving party demonstrates "either a combination of prob......
-
National Ass'n of Radiation Survivors v. Walters, C-83-1861-MHP.
...are raised and the balance of hardships tips sharply in his favor." William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., Inc., 526 F.2d 86, 88 (9th Cir.1976) (emphasis omitted), quoting Charlie's Girls, Inc. v. Revlon, Inc., 483 F.2d 953, 954 (2d Cir.1973). While, as demonstrated......
-
Judicial Relief and Remedies
...version. See FTC v. Warner Commc’ns, 742 F.2d 1156, 1162 (9th Cir. 1984); William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 526 F.2d 86, 88 (9th Cir. 1976) (remanding for application of alternative test). In a case brought by the FTC, the Eleventh Circuit also appeared to adop......
-
Table of Cases
...Co. v. Ross-Simmons Hardwood Lumber Co., 549 U.S. 312 (2007), 182 William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 526 F.2d 86 (9th Cir. 1976), 501, 527 Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, 555 U.S. 7 (2008), 503 Wisconsin v. Kenosha Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2......