The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

D served as a director, W. T. Grant Co. and S. H. Kress & Co., Sears Roebuck & Co. and Bond Stores, Inc., and Kroger Co. and Jewel Tea Co., Inc. P Alleged that the size and competitive relationship of each set of companies brought the interlocks within the reach of 8. P sued Ds and asked the court to order the particular interlocks terminated and to enjoin future violations of 8 by the individual and corporate defendants. Soon after the complaints were filed, D resigned from the boards of Kress, Kroger and Bond. Disclosing the resignations by affidavit, all of the Ds then moved to dismiss the actions as moot. Treated as motions for summary judgment, they were granted by the District Judge. He concluded that there is not 'the slightest threat that the defendants will attempt any future activity in violation of Section 8 [if they have violated it already] . . . .' P appealed contending that the cases were not rendered moot by D's resignations and that it was an abuse of discretion for the trial court to refuse any injunctive relief.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.