Search results
SuperValu, Inc. was an American wholesaler and retailer of grocery products. The company, formerly headquartered in the Minneapolis suburb of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, had been in business since 1926. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of United Natural Foods (UNFI). As of June 8, 2022, the SuperValu brand seems to be discontinued for everything besides some small-scale grocery stores. The ...
SUPERVALU INC. is one of the largest grocery wholesalers and retailers in the U.S. with annual sales of approximately $16 billion. SUPERVALU serves customers across the United States through a network of 3,337 stores composed of 3,120 stores operated by wholesale customers serviced primarily by Supervalu’s food distribution business and 217 traditional retail grocery stores operated under ...
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. Syllabus. UNITED STATES et al. ex rel. SCHUTTE et al. v. SUPERVALU INC. et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the seventh circuit. No. 21–1326. Argued April 18, 2023—Decided June 1, 2023
Apr 17, 2017 · On May 22, 2015, the United States elected not to intervene. Government's Notice of Election to Decline Intervention (d/e 20). The Complaint was then unsealed and served on Supervalu. On October 21, 2016, the Court denied Supervalu's Motion to Dismiss. Opinion entered October 21, 2016 (d/e 65).
Jun 1, 2023 · 740 UNITED STATES ex rel. SCHUTTE . v. SUPERVALU INC. Syllabus their actions were consistent with an objectively reasonable interpreta-tion of the phrase “usual and customary.” Thus, the Seventh Circuit concluded, the companies were entitled to summary judgment even if they actually thought that their discounted prices were their “usual and
Apr 18, 2023 · SuperValu Inc. U.S. ex rel. Schutte v. SuperValu Inc. is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 1, 2023, during the court's October 2022-2023 term. The case was argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on April 18, 2023. It was consolidated with U.S. ex rel. Proctor v. Safeway, Inc.
Oct 21, 2016 · Ergo , the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss under Rules 12 (b) (6) and 9 (b) [d/e 37] is DENIED. This action is referred to United States Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle–Haskins for further proceedings related to discovery and entry of a scheduling order. Read United States v. Supervalu, Inc., 218 F. Supp. 3d 767, see flags on bad law, and search ...
