Ex Parte: Francisco Lesa, III v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• “[T]he determination of whether implied repeal of the antitrust laws is necessary to make the Exchange Act provisions work is a matter for the courts.”
• “[T]he détermination of whether implied repeal of the antitrust laws is necessary to make the Exchange Act provisions work is a matter for the courts.”
• stock exchange rules allowing for the fixing of commission rates immune from the antitrust laws since Congress intended to leave the supervision of commission rates to the Securities and Exchange Commission
• cf. H.R.Rep No. 1383 at 6-7, 73d Cong, 2d Sess (1934)
• implied repeal is not favored and not casually allowed
• finding implied preclusion of antitrust laws

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).