Smith MacHinery Company, Inc. v. Hesston Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• collecting cases and conditioning invocation of law of the case on a party’s prior opportunity to have fully and fairly presented and argued its claims
• party not afforded full opportunity to litigate claims where state court stressed that its decision \[was] not to be construed as a commentary on the ultimate merits\
• “The primary objective of the Sherman Act is to benefit consumers by promoting efficient and beneficial competition”
• In most line-forcing situations the manufacturer does not prohibit the dealer from carrying competing lines
• party not afforded full opportunity to litigate claims where state court stressed that its decision “[was] not to be construed as a commentary on the ultimate merits”
• \[W]e observe that any preclusion arguments made with regard to the state antitrust claim logically would apply to the Sherman Act claim as well [because] [t]he relevant state law is patterned after section 1 of the Sherman Act....\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).