Karseal Corporation v. Richfield Oil Corporation

This case arises on the pleadings before trial, involves an action for treble damages based on §§ 3 and 4 of the Clayton Act, Act of Oct. 15, 1914, 38 Stat. 731 , 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 14 and 15, and § 1 of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, Act of July 2, 1890, 26 Stat. 209 , 15 U.S.C.A. § 1 , and is an aftermath of the government’s civil antitrust action against Richfield Oil Corporation, (United States v. Richfield Oil Corporation), D.C.S.D.Cal.1951, 99 F.Supp. 280 , affirmed per curiam in Richfield Oil Corporation v. United States, 1952, 343 U.S. 922 , 72 S.Ct. 665 , 96 L.Ed. 1334 , hereafter called the Rich-field case.

The case presents the sole question as to whether the amended complaint states a cause of action and therefore whether the motion to dismiss was properly granted by the trial judge. Directly involved is the scope of the “target area” of a defendant’s antitrust violation, in an antitrust suit for treble damages.

The amended complaint is based essentially on the Richfield case and in summary alleges:—

Karseal is a California corporation engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling in interstate commerce an automobile polish known as, and by its trade name of “Wax…