In 1964, plaintiff brought a treble damage suit under the Clayton Act in the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging that defendant had violated the antitrust laws while doing business in that district. Defendant, a Pennsylvania corporation which formerly had conducted a portion of its business in California but which had ceased all activities there in 1962, moved for dismissal, arguing that venue was improper because it was not transacting business in the Northern District of California at the time suit was instituted. On appeal from a ruling by the district court granting the motion for dismissal, held, reversed. The proper temporal reference for venue under the Clayton Act is the time when the cause of action accrued and therefore venue was proper because defendant had been transacting business in California when the alleged antitrust violations occurred.
Michigan Law Review,
Antitrust-Venue-Time of Venue Under Section 12 of the Clayton Act Refers to Time When Action Accrued-Eastland Construction Co. v. Keasbey & Mattison Co.,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol65/iss5/10