DOCSLIB.ORG

Sample Paca Reparation Cases by Subject Matter

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sample Paca Reparation Cases by Subject Matter SAMPLE PACA REPARATION CASES BY SUBJECT MATTER 1 The following list of cases is provided by The PACA Division as a public service. Neither the PACA Division nor USDA makes any representation regarding the completeness of the list of selected cases. It is likely that there are additional cases that should be referenced and/or researched for any particular dispute or issue of concern. While the PACA Division will make an effort to keep this list of sample reparation cases current, the PACA Division does not guarantee on any given day that the list is complete or up to date with recent judicial decisions. This case listing has not been reviewed by the Office of General Counsel. The Agriculture Decisions and other citations listed are all publicly accessible through the following listed sources: (1) Office of Administrative Law Judges, Judicial Decisions http://www.oaljdecisions.dm.usda.gov/agriculture-decisions-publication (2) U.S. Government Publishing Office (“GPO”) https://www.gpo.gov/ (3) Federal Depository Library http://catalog.gpo.gov/fdlpdir/FDLPdir.jsp (4) The National Agricultural Law Center, University of Arkansas School of Law www.NationalAgLawCenter.org (5) www.lexisnexis.com (6) www.westlaw.com (7) Cornell University Law School (online database) www.law.cornell.edu (8) Local college and university law libraries (ex. The Ross-Blakley Law Library at the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University has Agriculture Decisions) 2 Table of Contents 1. ABANDONMENT ............................................................................................................... 13 2. ACCEPTANCE OF PRODUCE ........................................................................................ 13 a. DIVERSION ..................................................................................................................... 13 b. FAILURE TO REJECT IN A REASONABLE TIME ................................................. 14 c. UNLOADING OR PARTIAL UNLOADING ............................................................... 14 d. PLACING ON CONSIGNMENT................................................................................... 15 e. PRELUDES SUBSEQUENT REJECTION .................................................................. 15 f. RESALE ............................................................................................................................ 15 g. REVOCATION ................................................................................................................ 15 h. UNLOADING INTO WAREHOUSE OR COLD STORAGE .................................... 15 i. WHEN UNLOADING IS NOT ACCEPTANCE .......................................................... 16 3. ACCEPTANCE OF REJECTION ..................................................................................... 16 4. ACCORD AND SATISFACTION ..................................................................................... 16 a. BANK WAS AGENT FOR ACCEPTANCE OF CHECK .......................................... 17 b. CONDITIONAL TENDER NECESSARY .................................................................... 17 c. GOOD FAITH DISPUTE NECESSARY ...................................................................... 18 d. GOOD FAITH TENDER NECESSARY ....................................................................... 18 e. MUST BE PLEADED ...................................................................................................... 18 f. MUST BE TENDERED AS PAYMENT IN FULL ...................................................... 18 g. RETENTION OF CHECK ............................................................................................. 19 h. RETURN OF CHECK..................................................................................................... 19 i. UNLIQUIDATED AMOUNT ......................................................................................... 19 j. VERBAL COUNTERMAND OF EFFECTIVE ........................................................... 19 k. VOIDING OF ................................................................................................................... 19 l. WHERE PAYMENT DID NOT SPECIFY ACCOUNT FOR APPLICATION ....... 20 5. ACCOUNTS STATED ........................................................................................................ 20 6. ACCOUNTS OF SALE ....................................................................................................... 20 a. ASSIGNMENT OF LOT NUMBERS ............................................................................ 20 b. FAILURE TO SHOW DATES OF RESALE................................................................ 20 c. MUST BE MORE THAN SUMMARY STATEMENT ............................................... 20 7. ACT OF GOD ...................................................................................................................... 21 8. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT ....................................................................... 21 9. AGENCY .............................................................................................................................. 21 a. APPARENT AUTHORITY ............................................................................................ 21 b. BAILMENT ...................................................................................................................... 23 c. DISCLOSURE OF PRINCIPAL .................................................................................... 23 d. EMERGENCY POWER OF AGENT AFTER TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY 25 e. EMPLOYEE OR AGENT OF PRINCIPAL ................................................................. 25 f. FIDUCIARY DUTIES ..................................................................................................... 25 g. GROWER’S AGENT ...................................................................................................... 26 h. LACK OF AUTHORITY ................................................................................................ 27 i. LIABILITY OF AGENT OR OTHER PARTY TO PRINCIPAL .............................. 27 j. PAYMENT - PROPER PARTY FOR ........................................................................... 28 k. PRIOR COURSE OF DEALING ................................................................................... 28 3 l. PROOF OF CONTRACT ............................................................................................... 29 m. PROOF OF EQUITABLE RELIEF .............................................................................. 29 n. RATIFICATION .............................................................................................................. 29 10. ALLOCATION OF PAYMENTS ...................................................................................... 30 11. ARBITRATION................................................................................................................... 30 12. ASSIGNMENT FOR BENEFIT OF CREDITORS NOT A DEFENSE ........................ 31 13. BOND REQUIREMENT FOR FOREIGN RESIDENTS ............................................... 31 14. BREACH OF CONTRACT ................................................................................................ 32 a. ANTICIPATORY REPUDIATION ............................................................................... 32 b. BY REASON OF BRAND ............................................................................................... 32 c. BY REASON OF GOVERNMENT STOP SALE ORDER ......................................... 33 d. MATERIAL BREACH ................................................................................................... 33 e. MISBRANDING .............................................................................................................. 34 f. OPEN SALE - BUYER’S BREACH BY SALE TO THIRD PARTY......................... 34 g. PART PERFORMANCE ................................................................................................ 34 h. TIMELY NOTICE REQUIRED .................................................................................... 34 15. BROKERS ............................................................................................................................ 35 a. ACCOMMODATION BROKERS ................................................................................. 35 b. ACTS INCONSISTENT WITH AGENCY RELATIONSHIP ................................... 35 c. APPARENT AUTHORITY ............................................................................................ 36 d. AUTHORITY ................................................................................................................... 36 e. BREACH OF DUTY ........................................................................................................ 36 f. COMMISSION ................................................................................................................ 38 g. CONFIRMATION OF SALE ......................................................................................... 38 h. DUTIES ............................................................................................................................. 38 i. STATEMENTS OF .......................................................................................................... 39 16. BURDEN OF PROOF ......................................................................................................... 39 a. ACCEPTANCE ...............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Food Distribution in the United States the Struggle Between Independents
    University of Pennsylvania Law Review FOUNDED 1852 Formerly American Law Register VOL. 99 JUNE, 1951 No. 8 FOOD DISTRIBUTION IN THE UNITED STATES, THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN INDEPENDENTS AND CHAINS By CARL H. FULDA t I. INTRODUCTION * The late Huey Long, contending for the enactment of a statute levying an occupation or license tax upon chain stores doing business in Louisiana, exclaimed in a speech: "I would rather have thieves and gangsters than chain stores inLouisiana." 1 In 1935, a few years later, the director of the National Association of Retail Grocers submitted a statement to the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives, I Associate Professor of Law, Rutgers University School of Law. J.U.D., 1931, Univ. of Freiburg, Germany; LL. B., 1938, Yale Univ. Member of the New York Bar, 1941. This study was originally prepared under the auspices of the Association of American Law Schools as one of a series of industry studies which the Association is sponsoring through its Committee on Auxiliary Business and Social Materials for use in courses on the antitrust laws. It has been separately published and copyrighted by the Association and is printed here by permission with some slight modifications. The study was undertaken at the suggestion of Professor Ralph F. Fuchs of Indiana University School of Law, chairman of the editorial group for the industry studies, to whom the writer is deeply indebted. His advice during the preparation of the study and his many suggestions for changes in the manuscript contributed greatly to the improvement of the text. Acknowledgments are also due to other members of the committee, particularly Professors Ralph S.
    [Show full text]
  • Automatic Merchandising of Grocery Products for Off-Premise Consumption
    This dissertation has been 64—7067 microfilmed exactly as received VANDEMARK, Vern Alvin, 1917- AUTOMATIC MERCHANDISING OF GROCERY PRODUCTS FOR OFF-PREMISE CONSUMPTION. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1963 Economics, commerce-business University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan AUTOMATIC MERCHANDISING- OP GROCERY PRODUCTS FOR OFF-PREMISE CONSUMPTION dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor o f Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University Vern Alvin Vandemark, B .S., M.A., M.S. ****** The Ohio State University 1963 Approved "by Adviser Department o f A gricultural Economics and Rural Sociology ACKK0WL3SDQMEHTS The author wishes to express his appreciation to the Automatic R etailers of America Educational Foundation, whose award o f a fellow­ ship made this study possible. The development and conclusions of the study, however, are wholly those of the author, who assumes all re­ sponsibility for the content of this dissertation. The author would also lik e to thank Professor Ralph W. Sherman for his counsel and guidance at every stage in the development of this study. Appreciation is expressed to Professors Elmer F. Baumer and George F. Henning who read the manuscript and offered valuable com­ ments and recommendations. The generous assistance and cooperation received from a great many individuals and organizations, without which this study would have been impossible, is gratefully acknowl­ edged. There is also need to mention the encouragement and moral support that I received from my wife, Joanne, and the continued interest and patience of my children, Susanne and John. Without the wholehearted support of my family, this study would have been most difficult, if not impossible.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Food Distribution Articles
    Index of Food Distribution Articles This list of papers is presented in subject classi- Warehousing, Transportation and Physical fication form following the Super Market Institute infor- Distribution Management mation Service classifications for their monthly index The papers included are for proceedings issues of service. Food Distribution Research Conferences from 1962 and The following additions have been made to the SMI include all Food Distribution Journal Articles through classifications: 1972 including the October 1972 Proceedings Issue. Air Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Copies of all these issues are available through the Con sumeri sm and Providing Food for Poor Food Distribution Research Society, Inc. People A I ist of all of these publications is presented at Groups-Retail Cooperatives, Voluntaries, the end of the Index. Other Wholesalers, Franchises and Individual articles may be listed under more than Brokers one classification if the content is such as to concern Top Management and Research Management two or more classifications. SMI classification titles Training, Education and Getting Research for which no article appears were not included. Adapted Categories Used: Accounting and Controls Grocery Handling Advertising Groups - Retai I Cooperatives, Vo Iuntaries, Other Air Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Wholesalers, Franchises and Brokers Bakery Manufacturers and Manufacturer Supplier Relations Bantam, Convenience and Drive-In Markets Meat Brands Merchandising Buying, Ordering Procedures and Inventories Mergers Checkout Operations Nutriments Other Than Standard Foods Consumerism and Providing Food for Poor People Packaging Credit and Del ivery Personnel Administration Customer Behavior Patterns and Characteristics Prices and Price Spreads Custwnar Relations and Services Produce Dairy Products Public Relations Del icatessen Restaurants, Snack Bars, Etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Mss0070 002 008.Pdf
    William Breman Jewish Heritage Museum Cuba Family Archives for Southern Jewish History Weinberg Center for Holocaust Education THE CUBA FAMILY ARCHIVES FOR SOUTHERN JEWISH HISTORY AT THE BREMAN MUSEUM MSS 70, ASSOCIATED GROCERS CO-OP INC. RECORDS Archives BOX 2, FILE 8 BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETNG JANUARYFamily 1969 – DECEMBER 1969 ANY REPRODUCTION OF THIS MATERIAL WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE CubaCUBA FAMILY ARCHIVES IS STRICLY PROHIBITED The William Breman Jewish Heritage Museum ● 1440 Spring Street NW, Atlanta, GA 30309 ● (678) 222-3700 ● thebreman.org MINUTES OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING~ JANUARY '20, 1969 A meeting of the Board of Directors was held on the above date. All board members I were present. Mr. J. D. Daniel, Chairman, called the meeting to order. Minutes of the previous meeting, held December 9, were read. After reading same the minutes were approved as read. Supplementing the previous minutes, the following report was rendered on the build­ ing, bids, etc.: The following four companies sent in bids: Basic Construction Company, Newport News, Virginia Brice Building Company, Birmingham, Alabama J. A. Jones Construction Co., Inc., Charlotte, N. C. McDonough Construction Company, Atlanta, Georgia The Building Committee and architects met on December 20 to receive and open the bids. The basic bids, including alternates, ranged from a high of $4,111 ,000 to a low of $3,809,000. The high was submitted by J. A. Jones Construction Company, and the low by Brice Building Company. To these bids the cost of the walls, grading, architects fees are to be added - an approximate additional cost of $1 ,096,000.
    [Show full text]
  • Marination, Llc
    No. 73417-2-I COURT OF APPEALS, DIVISION I OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DANA IMORI AND DANIEL IMORI Appellants, V. MARINATION, LLC Respondent. BRIEF OF RESPONDENT GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL LLP Joanne T. Blackbum, WSBA No. 21541 Abigail J. Caldwell, WSBA No. 41776 Attorneys for Respondent 600 University Street, Suite 2100 Seattle, Washington 98101 Telephone: (206) 676-7500 Facsimile: (206) 676-7575 [4838-8807-8120] TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 1 II. STATEMENT OF THE CASE ........................................................ 3 A. Facts Underlying the Dispute .............................................. 3 B. Procedural History .............................................................. 4 III. ARGUMENT ................................................................................... 6 A. Standard of Review .............................................................. 6 B. The Trial Court Properly Granted Summary Judgment ............................................................. 9 1. Imori Cannot establish that Marination Owed a Duty .. 9 a. There was no unreasonably dangerous condition ............................................... 11 b. Marination had no reason to expect that Imori would fail to discover the alleged danger .... 16 c. Marination exercised reasonable care .................... 17 2. There are no questions of fact.. ................................... .20 3. There is no evidence to support Imori' s claim that Marination failed to exercise
    [Show full text]
  • President's Daily Diary Collection (Box 78) at the Gerald R
    Scanned from the President's Daily Diary Collection (Box 78) at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library THE WHITE HOUSE THE DAILY DIARY OF PRESIDENT GERALD R. FORD PLACE DAY BEGAN DATE (Mo., Day, Yr.) THE WHITE HOUSE OCTOBER 15, 1975 ~ WASHINGTON, D.C. TIME DAY 8:10 a.m. WEDNESDA~ t HONE TIME "'" 'v ACTIVITY "~ '" 0:: co:" II II In Out "'- co: 8:10 The President had breakfast. 8 :40 The President went to the Oval Office. The President met with: 8:40 8:55 David A. Peterson, Chief, Central Intelligence Agency/Office of Current Intelligence (CIA/OCI) White House Support Staff 8:40 9 :10 Lt. Gen. Brent Scowcroft, Deputy Assistant for National Security Affairs The President met with: 9:10 9:50 Donald H. Rumsfeld, Assistant 9:10 9:50 Richard B. Cheney, Deputy Assistant 9;10 9:50 Jerry H. Jones, Sp~cial Assistant 9:10 9:30 Terrence O'Donnell, Aide 9:52 10:25 The President met with his Counsellor, Robert T. Hartmann. The President met with: 10:25 11:00 John O. Marsh, Jr., Counsellor 10:40 11:05 Mr. Hartmann 10:40 11:34 Mr. Rumsfeld 10:40 11 :05 Mr. Cheney 10:40 11:05 Max L. Friedersdorf, Assistant for Legislative Affairs 10:40 11:05 Ronald H. Nessen, Press Secretary 11:35 12 :13 The President met with Vice President Nelson A. Rockefeller. 12:20 The President went to the South Grounds of the White House. 12:20 12:27 The President motored from the South Grounds to the Washington Hilton Hotel, 1919 Connecticut Avenue.
    [Show full text]
  • Office City Docket Caption Frc Transfer #Ew Box
    OFFICE CITY DOCKET CAPTION FRC TRANSFER #EW BOX ACCESSION # 2 AMERICUS 0000708 SHULTZ SEC OF LABOR C FITZGERALD ETAL 021-88-0667 166 NRC-DO-021-11-021 2 AMERICUS 0000719 HODGSON SEC OF LABOR V FULLER 021-88-0667 166 NRC-DO-021-11-021 2 AMERICUS 0000723 HODGSON V ROANOKE CONSTRUCTION CO 021-88-0667 166 NRC-DO-021-11-021 2 AMERICUS 0000724 LONGINO V COLONIAL STORES INC 021-88-0667 166 NRC-DO-021-11-021 2 AMERICUS 0000728 ADAMS V WALTON 021-88-0667 166 NRC-DO-021-11-021 2 AMERICUS 0000738 WILLIS V GA & S L SMITH 021-88-0667 166 NRC-DO-021-11-021 2 AMERICUS 0000741 MATTHEWS V USA FROEHLKE SEC ARMY 021-88-0667 166 NRC-DO-021-11-021 3 ATHENS 0000741 WEST III V SHIRTMAKERS DIV OF CONSOLI 021-85-0250 177 NRC-DO-021-11-021 2 AMERICUS 0000744 HERNDON V PRESS 021-88-0667 166 NRC-DO-021-11-021 3 ATHENS 0000748 SCHOOF V BOARD EDUCATION GA 021-85-0250 177 NRC-DO-021-11-021 3 ATHENS 0000752 MCCORMICK V GRIFFITH 021-85-0250 177 NRC-DO-021-11-021 2 AMERICUS 0000753 BURTON V ALL STATE TRUCK STOP 021-88-0667 166 NRC-DO-021-11-021 2 AMERICUS 0000760 GAY V SMITH 021-88-0667 166 NRC-DO-021-11-021 3 ATHENS 0000767 CHORE TIME EQUIPMENT V GAINESVILLE MA 021-85-0250 177 NRC-DO-021-11-021 3 ATHENS 0000768 STROZIER V LAMONT SMITH GA ETAL 021-85-0250 177 NRC-DO-021-11-021 3 ATHENS 0000770 HODGSON V JONES ETAL 021-85-0250 177 NRC-DO-021-11-021 3 ATHENS 0000771 USA V HEYWARD CO ETAL 021-85-0250 177 NRC-DO-021-11-021 3 ATHENS 0000772 J D MATHIS V E B CALDWELL 021-85-0250 177 NRC-DO-021-11-021 2 AMERICUS 0000776 MORRISON V STEED CONCRETE 021-88-0667 166 NRC-DO-021-11-021
    [Show full text]
  • Officials Say Center for Juveniles Needed
    LIBRARY DRAWER D Ut^aii^t. iaUONK MEMaJKl/U. IMMI IAL Mid- rpe^ te (G^orgcfotun ®imeo Edition ESTABLISHED 1797 1 Vear In County $8.00 1 Year In State $900 Georgetown, S.C. 29440 Thursday, August 7, 1975 15' Per Copy Vol. 179 No. 71 1 Year Out of State $10.00 Officials Say Center For Juveniles Needed By CHRIS WESTON It s a tragedy when someone is placed in jail. And it is even more tragic when that someone Town Clock Getting Help is not but 12-years-old. That is why several persons in Some 21 individual "We're real happy with the The town Clock has long Georgetown County who deal families from Georgetown response we've gotten from been the symbol of the with juvenile criminal offenders County have donated $250 to these people," said Dennis community and was the first would like to see the creation of help pay for the repair of the Lawson, director of the Rice some type of juvenile detention Town Clock. Museum where the Town structure in Georgetown center. Clock is located. "However, County to be listed in the A system for dealing with The cost of the repair is we're lacking business and National Register of Historic juvenile criminal offenders was $6,000, but one individual has corporation support. Places. The clock has a prime community concern promised to pay half of that Hopefully some of the worked only on occasion that eventually led to the total if the community can businesses around town will during the past several creation of the Georgetown come up with the other half.
    [Show full text]
  • Meek V. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc
    ****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecti- cut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Con- necticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be repro- duced and distributed without the express written per- mission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ****************************************************** JEFFREY MEEK ET AL. v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., ET AL. (AC 21397) Lavery, C. J., and Schaller and West, Js. Argued May 6Ðofficially released September 24, 2002 (Appeal from Superior Court, judicial district of New London, Corradino, J.) Richard F. Wareing, with whom, on the brief, was Thomas J.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. XXI Fall 2016 No. 1 (LR) Chairman, William F. “Trey”
    Vol. XXI Fall 2016 No. 1 (L-R) Chairman, William F. “Trey” Underwood, III presents the 2016 Tradition of Excellence Awards at the Section Breakfast June 17th at the Omni Amelia Island Plantation Resort to Judge Michael L. Murphy, Buchanan (judicial); John W. Timmons, Athens (general practice); John A. Dickerson, Toccoa (defense); and William S. Stone, Blakey (plaintiff) MARK YOUR CALENDAR NOW for the 17th Annual GENERAL PRACTICE and TRIAL SECTION INSTITUTE MARCH 16, 17, 18, 2017 to be held at King and Prince Hotel St. Simons Island Chairman: William F. “Trey” Underwood, III GENERAL PRACTICE AND TRIAL SECTION STATE BAR OF GEORGIA Vol. XXI Fall 2016 No. 1 “Georgia’s Largest Law Firm” EDITOR David A. Sleppy ARTICLES EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR n Letter to the Membership from Incoming Chairman Betty Simms Kristine Orr Brown 2 2016/2017 OFFICERS Kristine Orr Brown n Remarks from Outgoing Chair Chairman William F. Trey Underwood, III. 4 Paul W. Painter, III Chairman-Elect Robert S. Register n 2016 Tradition of Excellence Awards Secretary/Treasurer William F. “Trey” Underwood, III John A. Dickerson Immediate Past Chair Introduced by Dennis Cathy 5 2016/2017 BOARD MEMBERS John W. Timmons Carl R. Varendoe Introduced by Jennifer Riley 8 Amy Purvis Holbrook Ivy Cadle Judge Michael L. Murphy Jennifer Riley Introduced by Bill Lundy & Karen Wilkes 13 Dawn M. Jones Judge Chris Edwards William S. Stone Thomas E. Cauthorn Introduced by Jim Butler 18 Senator Blake Tillery Judge Chan Caudell Ray J. Doumar n 2015 Tradition of Excellence Breakfast and Reception 22 Chandler Bridges Danny Griffin n Tortious Misconduct: James “Wick” Cauthorn A narrow exception to the general rule of corporate Kenneth L.
    [Show full text]
  • MAGNAVOX COMPANY, the (Modifying Order), 102 F.T.C
    , , 807 Modifying Order IN THE MATTER OF THE MAGNA VOX COMPANY MODIFYING ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SEC. 5 OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ACT Dockel 8822. Coruent Order, June 1971-Modifying Order luly , 1983 This order reopens the proceeding and modifies the Commission s order issued on June 1971 (78 F. C. 118.1, by amending Part I-T and deleting Part I-V ufthe order to permit the company to control the transshipment of its consumer electronic products. The modification also deletes Part III uftbe order, which had prohibited the company from engaging in exclusive dealing, flilliine forcing and tying prac- tices in connection with the sale of its producLo;. ORDER MODIFYING DECISION AND ORDER On February 2, 1983, respondent The Magnavox Company ("Mag- navox ) fied its "Request To Reopen And Modify Consent Order Request"), pursuant to Section 5(b) of the Federal Trade Commis- sion Act, 15 V. C. 45(b), and Section 2.51 of the Commission s Rules of Practice. The Request asked that the Commission reopen the con- sent order that was issued on June 9 1971, in this matter ("the order and modify it in two respects. First, Magnavox requested that certain words in Part I-T of the order and all of Part I-V be deleted to elimi- nate order language that prevents Magnavox from prohibiting trans- shipment of its consumer electronic products. Second, Magnavox requested that the Commission delete Part III of the order, which forbids respondent from engaging in exclusive dealing, full line forc- ing and tying practices in connection with the sale and distribution of its consumer electronic products.
    [Show full text]
  • 2,11%Nlliwtlmmltiwm
    M NlliwtlmmltiW 2,11% "‘0 '5‘“. O ' .1 .\ A. q LI ‘ f '. g‘, A‘ - “ ‘.. \ 5 I X e. O I 4 s: . a 'L% 4.. IJ‘ .. I -‘ I ‘ O O a - ’q" 1 o :.’;‘ .. O . C b I‘- a; A 1‘. C .'. J. l \ .5 9’. ' :1 g " ’CQN.‘.~"$... - ' '3 2". ~ X ‘“' . .' i. a3 '\ I on A ..o M. “s FACTORS AFFECTING TILE DZILI'J.~m”-.Y OF IERCIL’GIDISE IN TEE FOOD CHAR! INDUSTRY By Robert Han}; De Tieese A THESIS Submitted to the School of Ch‘aduate Studies of 1.103;}. 9‘ ‘1 State College of A-jriC'Jle‘e and Alieplied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the dcgrce cu. f‘ LESTER OF ARTS Dolmmnt of General Business Curriculum in Food Distribution 1952 111‘! [[[[.l|||l\1.l ACE-3011.1) CEL‘TS The writer wishes to express his sincere appreciation to Dr. Kenneth Wilson, Director of the Gmieulum in Food Distribution at Michigan State College, for his nterest, guidance, and valuable assistance during the preparation of this study. Grateful acknowledgement is due those companies referred to in this thesis, and in particular to Mr. K. G. Birdseye, Director of Research of the Grand Union Comm, Mr. L. D. Smith, Warehouse Operating Lismger of the Jewel Tea. Company, Incorporated, and Er. W. R. Rosenberger, Assistant Treasurer of the First National Stores, Incorporated, for their ampera- tion and help. Finally, I would also like to agrees my sincere thanks to Er. lensing P. Shield, Resident, and w. Iloyd ‘u’l. Malay, Secretazy, of the (band Union We, and to all other persons who provided the author with the opportunity to attend lflchigan State College .
    [Show full text]