Court Opinion

ID: 9449624
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 16:17:24.705012+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:31:54.946175
License: Public Domain

HAMLIN, Circuit Judge
(concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I concur in the opinion of the court insofar as it affirms the judgment against appellants T. G. Walker and Rose Walker, and insofar as it affirms the judgment against Walker Distributing Company as to Count Three of the complaint in question.
I respectfully dissent, however, to that portion of the opinion in which the judgment of the district court as to Count Two of said complaint is reversed. I would hold that the allegations of Count Two are insufficient to properly allege a conspiracy in restraint of trade in violation of section 1 of the Sherman Act.
I agree with the statement found in Nelson Radio & Supply Co. v. Motorola1 that a “general allegation of conspiracy, without a statement of the facts constituting the conspiracy to restrain trade, its object and accomplishment, is but an allegation of a legal conclusion, which is insufficient to constitute a cause of action. [Citations] ”
In my opinion there are not sufficient factual allegations to permit Count Two to withstand attack.
I would affirm the entire judgment.

. 200 F.2d 911, 913 (5th Cir., 1952), cert. den., 345 U.S. 925, 73 S.Ct. 783, 97 L.Ed. 1356.