Coca-Cola Bottling of Elizabethtown v. Coca-Cola Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that two bottlers had U.C.C.-governed contracts
• rights assigned to the bottlers under the decrees include “contents agreed to” in the decrees
• “the right to receive ‘syrup’ assigned to the unamended bottlers includes the right to receive ‘standard Bottlers Coca-Cola Syrup’ under Paragraph 10 of the Consent Decrees”
• “The ‘syrup’ first-line bottlers receive cannot be different from that which the Company bound itself to deliver under the Consent Decrees.”
• plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary in junction denied; amendment of complaint to request further relief allowed
• “The threshold of ‘peculiarity’ that the proposed action threatens must be high, because purely economic injuries are generally compensable and do not require injunctive relief.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).