Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
01-15963
|
Flamingo Industries Ltd. v. U.S. Postal Servcies
U.S. Postal Service constitutes 'person' under Lanham Act and is not entitled to sovereign immunity from antitrust claims. |
Antitrust |
|
Feb. 26, 2004 | |
02-682
|
Verizon Communications Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko
Complaint alleging violations of Telecommunications Act of 1996 does not state claim under Section 2 of Sherman Act. |
Antitrust |
|
Jan. 21, 2004 | |
01-56447
|
Glen Holly Entertainment Inc. v. Tektronix Inc.
Company forced out of business by joint venture of two competitors adequately alleged antitrust injury. |
Antitrust |
|
Oct. 24, 2003 | |
01-17451
|
International Healthcare Management v. The Hawaii Coalition for Health
Consortium to negotiate terms of company's provider agreement does not cause antitrust injury in violation of Sherman Act. |
Antitrust |
|
Jul. 25, 2003 | |
01-56245
|
Bourns Inc. v. Raychem Corp.
Jury instructions on misappropriation claim are harmless error; beginning business does not have standing to assert antitrust action. |
Antitrust |
|
Jul. 22, 2003 | |
01-35406
|
MetroNet Services Corp. v. US West Communications
Reseller of telephone services has demonstrated triable issues of fact sufficient to proceed on its antitrust claims against telephone company. |
Antitrust |
|
Jun. 16, 2003 | |
01-35849
|
Paladin Associates Inc. v. Montana Power Co.
There are no violations of antitrust laws where procompetitive justifications plainly outweigh alleged anticompetitive effects. |
Antitrust |
|
May 20, 2003 | |
01-56199
|
Freeman v. San Diego Association of Realtors
Real estate multiple listing service that charges fixed price to subscribers violates Sherman Act. |
Antitrust |
|
Mar. 18, 2003 | |
01-4109
|
Lantec Inc. v. Novell Inc.
Plaintiff didn't produce sufficient evidence to support inference of conspiracy to monopolize. |
Antitrust |
|
Sep. 22, 2002 | |
01-6067
|
Telecor Communications, Inc. v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.
Pay phone location owners define market where telephone company's anti-competitive behavior took place. |
Antitrust |
|
Sep. 16, 2002 | |
01-0046
|
Bunker's Glass Co. v. Pilkington plc
Indirect purchaser may bring action to recover damages resulting from alleged price-fixing by manufacturer. |
Antitrust |
|
Apr. 2, 2002 | |
99-56761
|
Lucas Automotive Engineering Inc. v. Bridgestone/Firestone Inc.
Relevant market, for purposes of Clayton Act violation, does not require claimant to establish sub-market to proceed with action. |
Antitrust |
|
Feb. 20, 2002 | |
99-17406
|
Cable Arizona Corp. v. Coxcom Inc.
Apartment owner who grants cable company access to units is not required to provide access to competing cable provider. |
Antitrust |
|
Nov. 30, 2001 | |
B136778
|
Chavez v. Whirlpool Corp.
Manufacturer that demands minimum resale prices does not commit anti-competitive conduct. |
Antitrust |
|
Oct. 29, 2001 | |
00-15101
|
Toscano v. Professional Golfers' Assoc.
No direct evidence supported plaintiff's allegations that Professional Golfers' Association violated Sherman Antitrust Act by conspiring to restrain trade. |
Antitrust |
|
Oct. 4, 2001 | |
00-55046
|
Tanaka v. University of Southern California
Collegiate soccer player's antitrust challenge to intercollegiate athletic association rule fails because of failure to identify relevant market. |
Antitrust |
|
Jul. 25, 2001 | |
S086738
|
Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Company
Prima facie case of antitrust violation required showing that petroleum companies acted collusively and not independently. |
Antitrust |
|
Jul. 12, 2001 | |
00-6047
|
Trigen-Oklahoma City Energy Corp. v. Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co.
State action doctrine protects company's state regulated electricity sales from federal antitrust liability. |
Antitrust |
|
May 16, 2001 | |
98-4157
|
Huntsman Chemical Corp. v. Holland Plastics Co.
Order |
Antitrust |
|
May 15, 2001 | |
99-35204
|
Snake River Valley Electric Assoc. v. Pacificorp
Idaho's Electronic Supplier Stabilization Act is not state-sponsored restraint of competition that is immune from antitrust scrutiny because it fails two-prong test. |
Antitrust |
|
Apr. 19, 2001 | |
96-15293
|
Image Technical Services Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co.
Monopolist's goal to exclude others from copyrighted work raises rebuttable justification presumption for refusal to deal. |
Antitrust |
|
Apr. 18, 2001 | |
98-17424
|
County of Toulumne v. Sonora Community Hospital
Hospital's requirement of only granting Board-certified obstetricians privileges to perform Cesarean-section deliveries isn't violation of antitrust laws. |
Antitrust |
|
Mar. 14, 2001 | |
99-3353
|
Law v. National Collegiate Athletic Association
Order |
Antitrust |
|
Mar. 6, 2001 | |
00-3135
|
Orr v. BHR Inc.
Order |
Antitrust |
|
Feb. 27, 2001 | |
S066735
|
Cel-Tech Communications Inc v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.
In order to violate Unfair Practices Act, company must act with the purpose of injuring competitor. |
Antitrust |
|
Feb. 14, 2001 | |
99-35204
|
Snake River Valley Electric Assn. v. Pacificorp
Idaho's Electronic Supplier Stabilization Act is not state-sponsored restraint of competition that is immune from antitrust scrutiny because it fails two-prong test. |
Antitrust |
|
Jan. 3, 2001 | |
99-04692
|
Garabet v. Autonomous Technologies Corp.
Plaintiffs who can establish only speculative damages as result of merger do not have standing to bring antitrust claim. |
Antitrust |
|
Oct. 18, 2000 | |
B094578
|
Cel-Tech Communications Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.
Cellular telephone provider's practice of selling phones below cost can constitute unfair competition. |
Antitrust |
|
Sep. 21, 2000 | |
99SC137
|
Ryals v. St. Mary-Corwin Regional Medical Center
Physician who accuses hospital of anti-competitive conduct is not required to bring claim before professional peer review committee. |
Antitrust |
|
Sep. 20, 2000 | |
99-391
|
Free v. Abbott Laboratories
Louisiana antitrust law does not grant standing to indirect purchasers of consumer products. |
Antitrust |
|
Jul. 6, 2000 |