International Carbonic Engineering Co. v. Natural Carbonic Products, Inc.

Good Law
57 F. Supp. 248·62 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 412·1944 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1917
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJuly 15, 1944Civil Action 1851-RJCalifornia246 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jenney, J.

I shall be most informal in giving this memorandum opinion. This case took seven weeks to try, and there have been pre-trial discussions and motions at one time and another, since the 21st day of October, 1941. Many hundreds of pages of pleadings and briefs have been filed, and literally hundreds of decisions have been cited.

My objective will be to indicate, as briefly as is possible after such a lengthy trial, my views on some of the many points which have been raised by counsel; and to give to counsel the reasoning behind my conclusions on these various points.

The original Complaint, filed on October 21, 1941, was amended by an Amended and Supplemental Complaint filed on February 28, 1944, and by a Further Amended and Supplemental Complaint filed on the same day.

The First and Amended Answer to Further. Amended Complaint filed by defendants Natural Carbonic Products, Inc., L. H. Polderman,- W. L. Benson, C. B. Benson and Natural Carbonic Products, a copartnership, and the answer of the George Pepperdine Foundation, were both slightly amended during the trial.

The Answer of Natural Carbonic contains a counterclaim against the plaintiffs, alleging unfair trade practices and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.