# Moutoux v. Gulling Auto Electric, Inc.

> Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · June 15, 1961 · 295 F.2d 573

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6921922

## Case

- **Full name:** George H. MOUTOUX, Carl J. Moutoux, Lucille M. Moutoux, Elise M. Trautvetter, William J. Moutoux, Partners d/b/a Moutoux Auto and Machine Co. v. GULLING AUTO ELECTRIC, INC., and Holley Carburetor Co., Inc.
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
- **Decided:** June 15, 1961
- **Citations:** 295 F.2d 573; 4 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 921
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Knoch
- **Judges:** Castle, Enoch, Knoch, Mercer
- **Cited by:** 58 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6921922

## Opinion text

KNOCH, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
Regretfully, I find myself in disagreement with the conclusion of Judge MERCER’S otherwise excellent analysis of this case.
As Judge MERCER states, Moutoux’s deposition supports Holley’s characterization of its lists as mere suggested price lists. According to Moutoux, plaintiffs never considered themselves bound by these suggested prices while they functioned as a Holley central. There is no indication of evidence to show any basic change in the character of the subsequent lists.
It further appears to me that Moutoux’s deposition indicates not only the extreme difficulty, to which Judge MERCER refers, but a sheer impossibility of sustaining plaintiffs’ allegations of conspiracy and monopolistic practices.
I would affirm the judgment of the District Court.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6921922. Public record. Not legal advice.