The State of Washington, Etc. v. The American League of Professional Baseball Clubs
Opinion
Opinion
Duniway, J.
Plaint.iffs-appellants appeal from the district court’s denial of their motion to remand under 28 U.S.C. § 1447 (c). Removal was on the ground that federal jurisdiction existed under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 (a) and 1441(b) because appellants’ complaint alleged violations of federal antitrust laws and challenged the validity of an order of a federal district court.
I. The Complaint.
Appellants’ complaint is long, elaborate, and not easy to summarize. It contains twelve claims based on four theories, each of which is separately alleged by the State of Washington, by the County of King, and by the City of Seattle. The First, Second and Third Claims are based on the appellees’ violation of “antitrust” laws. The first part of these claims, entitled “Monopolization of the Baseball Industry,” describes at some length the structure of professional baseball throughout the nation and the relationships among the major leagues, minor leagues, and individual club owners.
Paragraph 23 alleges that as a result of the organization of and co-operation between the American League and its member club owners, they have obtained monopoly power, and in general have artificially fixed the conditions for…