[opendtv] Re: EPA tightens up power specs for PCs

  • From: "John Shutt" <shuttj@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:24:41 -0500

John,

Granted I'm not even close to being a lawyer, but by the way I read Lexus/Nexus, the case was moved from Los Angeles to Chicago upon petition by the defendants.

Therefore the Chicago case is the Los Angeles case, and the fine was $5000, not $1, but the message remains the same.

UNITED STATES v. NATIONAL CITY LINES, Inc., et al.
Cr. No. 19270
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, CENTRAL DIVISION


7 F.R.D. 393; 1947 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1686

August 14, 1947
OPINION BY: YANKWICH
OPINION:  [*395]

The defendants, indicted for violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Law, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1-7, 15 note, have moved to transfer the proceeding to another district under the provision of the Federal Criminal Rules of Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A. following section 687, which reads:

'The court upon motion of the defendant shall transfer the proceeding as to him to another district or division, if it appears from the indictment or information or from a bill of particulars that the offense was committed in more than one district or division and if the court is satisfied that in the interest of justice the proceeding should be transferred to another district or division in which the commission of the offense is charged.'

The motion of the defendants to transfer the cause to the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, is, therefore, granted.


----- Original Message ----- From: "John Willkie" <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 3:59 PM
Subject: [opendtv] Re: EPA tightens up power specs for PCs



All that may be true, but the LA case was on point. and a $1 verdict for the plaintiffs.

In the NCL case, GM found advantage by -- instead of letting them fail profoundly -- buying failing transit companies and getting them to buy GM-centric products and services. It kept failing companies alive, with GM holding the tether. As a result of the verdict, transit in Chicago became government-owned on the same post-war time scale as most others.

Funny, this summary didn't mention GM's cross-investment in Dupont (which was spun off a few years before the verdict due to government action and settled separately.)


John Willkie

-----Original Message-----
From: John Shutt <shuttj@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Oct 30, 2006 11:55 AM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: EPA tightens up power specs for PCs

From Wikipedia, but mostly accurate. GM was convicted on antitrust for
forcing National City Lines (the evil GM bus company) to buy only GM busses.
There was no convictions on conspiring to purchase and put out of business
trolley lines.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy

Government attorney Bradford Snell has written that in 1949 GM and its
partners in NCL were convicted in U.S. District Court in Chicago of criminal
conspiracy in this matter and fined $5,000 each for anti-trust violations
(contracts in restraint of trade, i.e. forcing subsidiaries to buy products
from their owners: GM buses, Firestone tires, Standard and Phillips oil).


The claim above is often repeated and is based on testimony by Snell to a
United States Senate inquiry in 1974.

The case ultimately reached the United States Supreme Court in United States
v. National City Lines Inc. 334 U.S. 573, 596 (1948) ("National City I")[1]
which reversed lower court rulings on the case.


The proceedings were against General Motors and its subsidiary National City
Lines, along with seven other corporations. They were indicted on two counts
under the US Sherman Antitrust Act. The charges, in summary, were:


Conspiring to acquire control of a number of transit companies, forming a
transportation monopoly;
All defendants were acquitted on this charge.

Conspiring to monopolize sales of buses and supplies to companies owned by
National City Lines.
General Motors alone was convicted on this charge.

----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Barry" <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 2:48 PM
Subject: [opendtv] Re: EPA tightens up power specs for PCs



John -

Which case are you referring to?

- Tom


John Willkie wrote:
Ah, yes.  The "famous" case in LA.  After 13 years of litigation the
"trolley" interests (long bought out by GM) "won."

The award should have been a message.  13 years of litigation.  You
"won."  And, the judge awarded you $1.




----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.




---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.






----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts: