|
Commonwealth v Fisher, 226 Pa 189; 75 A 204 (3 Jan
1910)
M'Lauchlan v Anderson, 1 Scot Law Times 127; 48 Sc
L Rep 349; 4 SWCC 376 (1 Feb 1910)
Ware-Kramer Tobacco Co v American Tobacco Co, 178
F 117 (ED NC, 8 March 1910) (monopoly case)
Watson v Kentucky & Indiana Bridge & R Co, 137 Ky
619; 126 SW 146 (Ky App, 18 March 1910)
City of Seattle v Dencker, 58 Wash 501; 108 P 1086
(28 May 1910)
Ware-Kramer Tobacco Co v American Tobacco Co, 180
F 160 (ED NC, 16 June 1910) (criminal conspriacy issue, violation of
criminal law can result in damage to private citizen)
Watson v Kentucky & Indiana Bridge & R Co, 137 Ky
619; 129 SW 341 (17 June 1910). SCB: 137 Ky 619; 126 SW 146
Collins v Com of Ky, 141
Ky 565; 133 SW 233 (13 Jan 1911) (tobacco
farmer pooling case)
Maloney v Com of Ky, 141 Ky 570; 133 SW 235 (13
Jan 1911) (tobacco
farmer pooling case)
Norfolk & W.R. Co v Dixie Tobacco Co, 111 Va 813;
69 SE 1106 (26 Jan 1911) (business
practices case; issue of damage to tobacco in shipment)
Hershberg v City of Barbourville, 142 Ky 60; 133
SW 985; 34 LNS 141; Ann Cas 1912D, 189 (3 Feb 1911)
United
States v
American Tobacco Co, 221 US 106; 31 S Ct 632; 55 L Ed 663 (NY,
29 May 1911). SCB: 164 F 700
Fifth Ave
Coach Co v
City of New York, 221 US 467; 31 S Ct 709; 55 L Ed 815 (29
May 1911) (case upholding City authority to regulate
tobacco
advertising). SCB: 126 App Div 657; 110 NYS 1037; 58 Misc 401, 111
NYS 759; 194 NY 26, 21 LRA(NS) 744, 86 NE 824; 16 A & E Ann Cas 695
American Tobacco Co v Bland, 145
Ky 157;
140 SW 69 (27 Oct 1911) (business
case, resisting worker compensation claim)
United States v American Tobacco Co, 191 F 371 (15
Nov 1911). SCB: 164 F 700
American Tobacco Co v Globe Tobacco Co, 193 F 1015
(D Mich, 2 Dec 1911) (unfair
trade practices case)
Burley Tobacco Society v Thomas, 145 Ky 748; 141
SW 66 (8 Dec 1911) (tobacco farmer sold outside the society's sprocess)
Burley Tobacco Society v Thomas, 145 Ky 750; 141
SW 67 (8 Dec 1911) (tobacco farmer sold ouside the society's process)
In re Leaf
Tobacco Board of Trade of the City of New York, 222 US 578; 32
S Ct 833; 56 L Ed 323 (11 Dec 1911)
Locker v American Tobacco Co, 194 F 232 (22 Jan
1912) (issue of specificity in allegations, where guilt of others is
shown, and this defendant knew)
Latimer
v U S, 223 US 501; 32 S Ct 242; 56 L Ed 526 (PR, 19 Feb
1912) (trade
case, re
tax
on sweepings used in
cigarettes)
United Cigarette Machine Co v Wright, 193 F 1023
(CA 4, NC, 12 March 1912) (business
practices case) SCB: 132 F 195; 156 F 244
Com. of Kentucky v International Harvester Co of
America, 147 Ky 564; 144 SW 1064 (Ky
App, 16 March 1912) (first
in a series of convictions, under Kentucky law letting tobacco
growers but not manufacturers market in combination)
Com. of Kentucky v International Harvester Co of
America, 144 Ky 795; 146 SW 12 (Ky App, 18 April 1912) (second
conviction)
Burley Tobacco Society v Monroe, 148 Ky 289; 146
SW 725 (Ky App, 10 May 1912) (tobacco farmer pooling case)
Int'l Harvester Co of America v Com of Kentucky,
148 Ky 572; 147 SW 1199 (Ky App, 28 May 1912) (third conviction)
Locker v American Tobacco Co, 197 F 495 (SD NY, 18
July 1912) (conspiracy in restraint of trade case; only government can
get a preventive injunction; a private individual can only get
after-the-fact damages)
Locker v American Tobacco Co, 200 F 973 (SD NY, 29
Nov 1912) (issue of specificity)
Burley Tobacco Society v Gillaspy, 51 Ind App 583;
100 NE 89 (12 Dec 1912)
Athanasaw
v U S, 227 US 326; 33 S Ct 285; 57 L Ed 528 (24 Feb 1913) (crime
case, white slave issue, girl recruited for debauchery by smokers)
American Tobacco Co v People's Tobacco Co, Ltd,
204 F2d 58 (CA 5, La, 12 April 1913) (conspiracy in restraint of trade
case)
Texas & P
R. Co v
Stewart, 228 US 357; 33 S Ct 548; 57 L Ed 875 (Texas, 21 April
1913) (passenger injured leaving smoking car)
Norfolk &
W.R. Co v
Dixie Tobacco Co, 228 US 593; 33 S Ct 609; 57 L Ed 980 (12 May
1913) (business
practices case; issue of damage to tobacco in shipment). SCB: 111
Va 813; 69 SE 1106
Manson v Forth & Clyde Steamship Co, [1913] SC
921; 50 Scot L R 475; [1913] WC & Ins Rep 399; 6 BWCC 830 (23 May
1913) (worker
cigarette fire case)
Lebus v Stansifer, 157 SW 727 (Ky App, 17 June
1913) (pooling case)
Allen v State, 10 Okla Crim Rep 75; 133 P 1138 (26
July 1913)
State v Olson, 26 ND 304; 144 NW 661;
LRA 1918B,
975 (29 Nov 1913)
City of Zion v Behrens, 262 Ill 510; 104 NE 836;
51 LNS 562 (21 Feb 1914)
International Harvester Co of America
v Com. of Kentucky, 234 US 216; 34 S Ct 853; 58 L Ed 1284
(8 June 1914) (business
practices case; Kentucky law allowed tobacco growers to market in
combination, but banned manufacturers from doing so; convicted IHC in
three different courts; IHC appealed on constitutional grounds
including vagueness, and prevailed). SCB: (a) 147 Ky 564, 144 SW 1064,
(b) 144 Ky 795, 146 SW 12, and (c) 148 Ky 572, 147 SW 1199
Collins
v Com. of Kentucky, 234 US 634; 34 S Ct 924; 58 L Ed 1510
(22 June 1914) (farmer
vs tobacco pool case). SCB: 141 Ky 565; 133 SW 233
Malone
v Com. of Kentucky, 234 US 639; 34 S Ct 926; 58 L Ed 1512
(22 June 1914) (farmer
vs tobacco pool case). SCB: 141 Ky 570; 133 SW 235
Locker v American Tobacco Co, 218 F 447 (CA 2, 10
Nov 1914) (a law violation is not proof of harm per se to a private
individual)
People v Blumerich, 183 Mich 133; 149 NW 1040 (18
Dec 1914)
Commonwealth v American Tobacco Co, 162 Ky 716;
172 SW 1085 (11 Feb 1915) (tax
case)
Liggett & Myers Tobacco Co v Cannon, 132
Tenn
419; 178 SW 1009; LRA 1916A 940; Ann Cas 1917A 179 (25 Aug 1915)
Commonwealth v American Tobacco Co, 167 Ky 157;
180 SW 58 (2 Dec 1915) (price fixing case, remanded to apply the
Brent decision)
United Cigar Stores v Stewart, 144 Ga 724; 87 SE
1034 (22 Feb 1916) (tax
case)
D. H. Watzen & Co v Louisville Tobacco Warehouse Co,
240 F 919 (CA 6, Ky, 17 Nov 1916)
Chludzinski v Standard Oil Co, 176 App Div 87; 162
NYS 225 (28 Dec 1916)
Balch v State ex rel. Grigsby, Co Atty, 65 Okl
146; 164 P 776 (30 Jan 1917) (public nuisance case)
Tandy & Fairleigh Tobacco Co v Hopkinsville, 174
Ky 189; 192 SW 46 (23 Feb 1917) (tax
case)
Haller v City of Lansing, 195
Mich 753;
162 NW 335; LRA 1917E, 324 (9 April 1917) (worker
compensation case involving
fire)
Dzikowska v Superior Steel Co, 65 PLJ 502; 31 York
Law Record 67 (23 April 1917). SCB: WCAB. (Pennsylvania
worker compensation case)
American Tobacco Co v Troutman, 175 Ky 436; 194 SW
543 (4 May 1917) (business
case, resisting worker compensation claim)
Olson v State of North Dakota, 245 US 676; 38 S Ct
13; 62 L Ed 542 (17 Oct 1917). SCB: 26 ND 304; 144 NW 661
Post Printing & Publishing Co v Brewster, Atty Gen of
Kansas, 246 F 321 (D Kan, 8 Dec 1917)
M. B. Fahey Tobacco Co v Senior, 247 F 809 (ED
Pa,
22 Dec 1917) (copyright
and trademark case)
Dzikowska v Superior Steel Co, 259 Pa 578; 103 A
351; LRA 1918F, 888 (7 Jan 1918). SCB: 65 PLJ 502; 31 York 67
In re Betts, 66 Ind App 484; 118 NE 551 (18 Jan 1918) (worker
compensation case)
People's Tobacco Co v American Tobacco Co, 246 US
79; 38 S Ct 233; 62 L Ed 587; Ann Cas 1918C, 537 (4 March 1918). SCB:
204 F2d 58 (conspiracy in restraint of trade case)
Dawkins v Billingsley, 69 Okla 259; 172 P 69 (9
April 1918)
Pillars v R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co, 117 Miss 490;
78 So 365 (15 April 1918) (dangerous
tobacco product liability case)
State v C. C. Taft Co, 183
Iowa 548;
167 NW 467; 9 ALR 390 (7 May 1918) (institutionalizing the
right to fresh and pure air via an 1897 cigarette ban)
Whiting-Mead Commercial Co v Industrial Accident
Commission, 178 Cal 505; 173 P 1105; 5 ALR 1518 (3 July 1918) (workers'
compensation case)
M. B. Fahey Tobacco Co v Senior, 164 CCA 495; 252
F 579 (CA 3, Pa, 27 July 1918) (copyright
and trademark case). SCB: 247 F 809
American Tobacco Co v Bowling Green, 181 Ky 416;
205 SW 570 (27 Sep 1918) (tax
case)
R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co v City of Lexington, 181
Ky 503; 205 SW 592 (4 Oct 1918) (license case)
Rish v Iowa Portland Cement Co, 186
Iowa 443;
170 NW 532 (23 Jan 1919)
Compania
General de Tabacos de Filipinas
v Alhambra Cigar, 249 US 72 (Philippines, 3 March 1919)
(trade-name infringement case)
Taft Co, et al v Abbey, 185
Iowa 1069;
171 NW 719 (11 April 1919) (upholding reporting violators of the 1897
cigarette sales ban, including owners of buildings wherein illegal
sales occured)
|
