Maltz v. Sax

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a “construction of the Sherman Act” that would bar the plaintiff’s claim was “[m]ore consistent with our general public policy”
• discussing “against-public-policy businesses practices which include the use of gambling machines” and noting that “[f]ederal courts have consistently condemned [gambling] as against public policy”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).