In the case of Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., et al., 1961, Miami Beach Radio Station (owned by Poller) sued CBS and other defendants for monopolistic practices that allegedly forced it out of business. The plaintiff claimed that CBS had conspired to monopolize network broadcasting in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act. The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of CBS on grounds that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and dismissed the complaint. However, upon appeal, the Supreme Court reversed this decision stating that summary procedures should be used sparingly in complex antitrust litigation where motive and intent play leading roles since they are not suited for disposition on affidavits which may not disclose actual issues or facts present therein.

In the dissenting opinion for Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., Justice Harlan disagreed with the majority's decision to reverse and remand the case back to trial court. He argued that there was no substantial evidence presented by Poller to support his claim of a conspiracy between CBS and other parties involved in violation of antitrust laws. According to him, mere allegations without concrete proof should not be enough grounds for a lawsuit or retrial. Furthermore, he stated that such decisions could potentially open floodgates for baseless lawsuits based on unsubstantiated claims which would unnecessarily burden courts and defendants alike.