Niagara of Buffalo, Inc. v. Niagara Manufacturing and Distributing Corporation, Defendant-Respondent

PER CURIAM. This is an action under 15 U.S.C.A. § 15 to recover treble damages for alleged violations of the anti-trust laws. Defendant moved under Rule 12(b), Fed. Rules Civ.Proc. 28 U.S.C.A. to dismiss each count of the amended complaint for failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The motion was granted and the complaint dismissed. In his opinion, reported in 161 F.Supp. 849, at page 850, the District Judge stated: “ * * * Preparation of a proper pleading for an anti-trust suit requires a statement of matters and their relation to each other considerably more extensive than in a simple pleading in negligence or on contract. “* * * the complaint herein might possibly be sufficient in the ordinary commercial case, but it does not allege the acts complained of with sufficient specificity to be a proper complaint in this type of case This view of the requisites of a complaint in anti-trust cases is incorrect. Nagler v. Admiral Corporation, 2 Cir., 248 F.2d 319. The motion should have been denied. Judgment reversed and cause remanded.