Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

GE v. HESS BROS.

August 19, 1957

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY
v.
HESS BROTHERS, Inc.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: DUSEN

The trial judge makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law:

I. Findings of Fact

 1. Plaintiff's requested Findings of Fact Nos. 1, 2, 4-15, and defendant's requested Findings of Fact Nos. 2, 6-23, *fn1" 25, and 26 are adopted as the Findings of this court.

 Defendant's requested Findings of Fact Nos. 84-91 are adopted as being substantially correct (see affidavits attached to the stipulation filed March 29, 1957).

 The advertising of defendant preceding and during its sale from August 24 to September 4, 1956, of plaintiff's fair-traded products at less than the minimum fair trade prices and the sales by defendant at these prices during these ten days caused a general collapse in plaintiff's ability to maintain fair trade prices in defendant's trading area (see, for example, Exhibits P-2, P-3, P-4, P-5, P-7, P-8 and P-9).

 2. Plaintiff's requested Finding of Fact No. 16 is adopted with the following modifications:

 (a) Benco Sales Company

 Add on page 5, following the activity on the date of July 11, 1956:

 'Aug. 8, 1956. Plaintiff received notice from the defendant in a letter dated August 8, 1956 (Exhibit D-23), as to the sale of a General Electric fair-traded product below the fair trade price.

 'Aug. 10, 1956. Plaintiff authorized its agents to place an order by mail for goods at less than the fair trade price.'

 Add on page 5 plaintiff's answer to defendant's Interrogatory No. 5-j (see Clerk's document No. 19) following the activity of September 12, 1956.

 (b) Save-All, inc.

 Add on page 5 plaintiff's answer to defendant's Interrogatory No. 5-a (see Clerk's document No. 19) following the activity of June 21, 1956.

 (c) Lee-Mart

 Add on page 5, following the activity on the date of July 9, 1956:

 'July 13, 1956. Plaintiff received notice from the defendant in a letter dated July 9, 1956, as to the sale of a General Electric fair-traded product below the fair trade price. (N.T. 357).'

 Add on page 6 plaintiff's answer to defendant's Interrogatory No. 5-b (see Clerk's document No. 19) following the activity of August 28, 1956.

 (d) Bargain Center (Freemansburg)

 Add the following on page 8, following the title 'Bargain Center (Freemansburg):'

 'June 27, 1956. Plaintiff received notice from General Electric Supply Co. in Allentown reporting a verbal complaint made to it from defendant (N.T. 299-300).

 'June 28, 1956. Plaintiff wired Bargain Center advising them of General Electric's fair trade prices and General Electric's intention to enforce fair trade prices. Also, plaintiff mailed its No. 1 warning letter by certified mail and prepared a shopping double-purchase authorization, which was dated July 2, 1956 (N.T. 300).'

 Add on page 9, following the activity on the date of July 6, 1956:

 'July 6, 1956. Plaintiff received back its No. 1 warning letter marked 'Refused' (see Exhibit P-14) and authorized Pinkerton Detective Agency to personally deliver the same letter (N.T. 315-6).

 'July 13, 1956. Plaintiff received notice from the defendant in a letter dated July 9, 1956, repeating the complaint of June 29, 1956, noted above, as to the sale of a General Electric fair-traded product below the fair trade price (N.T. 316).'

 Add on page 9 plaintiff's answer to defendant's Interrogatory No. 5-c (see Clerk's document No. 19) following the activity of August 10, 1956.

 (e) Roth Brothers

 Add on page 9, following the activity on the date of August 8, 1956:

 'Aug. 8, 1956. Plaintiff mailed its No. 1 warning letter by certified mail with return receipt requested, and prepared a shopping authorization dated August 16, 1956 (N.T. 320).'

 Add on page 10 plaintiff's answer to defendant's Interrogatory No. 5-d (see Clerk's document No. 19) following the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.