In the Interest of Z.T., Minor Child

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a statute entitling a party to “have injunctive relief’ entitles parties to both prohibitory and mandatory injunctions under the “traditional principles of equity”
• holding that a statute entitling a party to “have injunc- tive relief” entitles parties to both prohibitory and manda- tory injunctions under the “traditional principles of equity”
• holding that private challenger may obtain divestiture after a merger has taken place
• observing that prior decisions have “upheld injunctions issued pursuant to § 16 regardless of whether they were mandatory or prohibitory in character”
• stating that failure to gain an advantage in prior litigation cuts against a finding of judicial estoppel
• holding that district court had the power to order divesture under the Clayton Act in an action where plaintiff “alleged that [supermarket chain] merger violated § 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, and § 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).