For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices or call 949-702-5390.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...
Daily appellate reports
Sign up for Daily Journal emails
    Filter by date
     to 
    Search by Case Name
    Search by Judge
    Search by Case Number
    Search by DJ Citation Number
    Search by Category
    Search by Court
Name Category Published
Diaz v. Farley
Agreement with hospital for doctor to be exclusive provider of anesthesiology services does not warrant per se analysis under Sherman Act. 		Antitrust Jul. 5, 2000
United States v. Microsoft Corp.
Software company violates Section 2 of Sherman Act by engaging in exclusionary, anticompetitive and predatory acts to maintain its monopoly. 		Antitrust May 16, 2000
United States v. Microsoft Corp.
Software company violates Section 2 of Sherman Act by engaging in exclusionary, anticompetitive and predatory acts to maintain its monopoly. 		Antitrust May 16, 2000
United States v. Microsoft Corp.
Software company violates Section 2 of Sherman Act by engaging in exclusionary, anticompetitive and predatory acts to maintain its monopoly. 		Antitrust May 16, 2000
United States v. Microsoft Corp.
Software company violates Section 2 of Sherman Act by engaging in exclusionary, anticompetitive and predatory acts to maintain its monopoly. 		Antitrust May 16, 2000
Nova Designs Inc. v. Scuba Retailers Assn.
Short-lived agreement requiring exchange of confidential customer information in return for free advertising isn't per se violation of Sherman Act. 		Antitrust Mar. 30, 2000
Hise v. Philip Morris Inc.
Order 		Antitrust Mar. 2, 2000
Solahart Industries Pty. Ltd., v. International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials
Nonprofit industry association code standards aren't unconstitutional, don't violate Sherman Act nor constitute a tort. 		Antitrust Feb. 8, 2000
Freeman v. San Diego Assn. of Realtors
Local associations merged to form one corporate entity to sell multiple listing services does not violate antitrust laws. 		Antitrust Jan. 28, 2000
Modesto Irrigation District v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.
Public utility's refusal to provide electricity to power wholesaler isn't anti-competitive and falls within scope of 'Noerr-Pennington' immunity. 		Antitrust Dec. 8, 1999
Western Parcel Express v. United Parcel Service of America Inc.
Sherman Act claim fails where complainant cannot show that there are significant barriers to entry or expansion in the relevant market. 		Antitrust Dec. 3, 1999
American Ad Management Inc. v. General Telephone Co. of California
Sellers of advertising space in telephone directories have standing to allege antitrust violations by directories' publishers. 		Antitrust Dec. 3, 1999
Redwood Empire Life Support v. County of Sonoma
Municipality may grant monopoly for ambulance services, including nonemergency transports, without violating Sherman Act. 		Antitrust Dec. 3, 1999
7-Up Bottling Co. of Jasper Inc. v. Varni Brothers Corp.
Sherman Act price fixing violation based on circumstantial evidence must exclude possibility that defendant acted independently. 		Antitrust Dec. 3, 1999
Full Draw Productions v. Easton Sports Inc.
Antitrust injury under Sherman Act is sufficiently alleged where group boycott by customers against a producer leads to loss of competition. 		Antitrust Nov. 10, 1999
Big Bear Lodging Assn. v. Snow Summit Inc.
Competitors to, rather than customers of, alleged price-fixing scheme cannot demonstrate antitrust injury, as they benefit from inflated prices. 		Antitrust Sep. 30, 1999
California CNG Inc. v. Southern California Gas Co.
California utility's subsidy of natural-gas vehicle fueling stations isn't state action immune from federal scrutiny. 		Antitrust Aug. 6, 1999
California CNG Inc. v. Southern California Gas Co.
California utility's subsidy of natural-gas vehicle fueling stations isn't state action immune from federal scrutiny. 		Antitrust Aug. 5, 1999
Morrison v. Viacom, Inc.
State antitrust law prohibiting anticompetitive 'tying' practices isn't pre-empted by federal cable television law. 		Antitrust Jul. 29, 1999
American Professional Testing Service Inc. v. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich
Dominant bar review sponsor can distribute disparaging fliers about competitor and hire away faculty member. 		Antitrust Jul. 26, 1999
Exxon v. Superior Court (Koutney)
Relevant market for assessing anticompetitive behavior by oil company is all gasoline, not just one brand. 		Antitrust Jul. 19, 1999
State Oil Co. v. Khan
Case law providing vertical maximum price fixing is per se antitrust violation is overruled. 		Antitrust Jul. 19, 1999
County of Stanislaus v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.
Filed rate doctrine prohibits antitrust challenge to gas quantity imported by utility after federal agency approval. 		Antitrust Jul. 18, 1999
Amarel v. Connell
Grower, as de facto competitor, has standing in predatory pricing action against vertically-integrated rice cooperative. 		Antitrust Jul. 15, 1999
Exxon Corp. v. Superior Court (Koutney)
Relevant market for assessing anticompetitive behavior by oil company is all gasoline, not just one brand. 		Antitrust Jul. 15, 1999
Morrison v. Viacom
State antitrust law prohibiting anticompetitive 'tying' practices isn't pre-empted by federal cable television law. 		Antitrust Jul. 13, 1999
Columbia Steel Casting Co. Inc. v. Portland General Electric Co.
Private conduct is immunized from antitrust liability if it is foreseeable result of state agency action. 		Antitrust Jul. 8, 1999
Chroma Lighting v. GTE Products Corp.
In price-discrimination action, competition injury is conclusively established by proof of individual competitor's injury. 		Antitrust Jul. 8, 1999
McDaniel v. Appraisal Institute
No trade restraint by 90 percent of work going to appraisers certified by private, nonprofit association. 		Antitrust Jun. 16, 1999
Omega Environmental Inc. v. Gilbarco Inc.
Elevated proof of market's 'substantial foreclosure' applies to allegations dominant manufacturer imposed exclusive dealer distributor policy. 		Antitrust Jun. 16, 1999
By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.