Krehl

Krehl v. Baskin-Robbins Ice Cream Co.

Good Law
25 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 651·78 F.R.D. 108·1978 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19608
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaFebruary 10, 1978No. CV 76-1797-DWWCalifornia7,606 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Williams, J.

ORDER RE CERTIFICATION UNDER RULE 23 F.R.C.P.

Twenty store franchise owners have brought this antitrust action against Baskin-Robbins Ice Cream Co., its subsidiaries and its area franchisors alleging violations of § 1 of the Sherman Act ( 15 U.S.C. § 1 ) and § 3 of the Clayton Act ( 15 U.S.C. § 14 ). Jurisdiction is claimed under §§ 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act ( 15 U.S.C. §§ 15 and 26) and 28 U.S.C §§ 1331 and 1337. The complaint was filed on June 4, 1976. A first amended complaint was filed August 3, 1976, alleging that the defendants conspired to restrain trade by: (1) tying sales of ice cream products, store leases, equipment, supplies and advertising to the sale of the Baskin-Robbins trademark; (2) by fixing the wholesale prices of ice cream products; and (3) by maintaining the resale price of ice cream products. Plaintiffs have raised an additional allegation of territorial mar *113 ket division and propose to amend their complaint appropriately to include this allegation. As to each of the claims, the plaintiffs pray for treble damages, injunctive relief, costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees.

Plaintiffs have moved this court under Rule 23(c)(4) of the Federal Rules of…

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.