holding that a "but for" damage model is "fatally deficient" where it provides "no basis for the Court to determine without speculation the amount of damage, if any, caused by any of the particular actions of the defendants"
Summary of this case from Rossi v. Standard Roofing, Inc.No. 84-1080.
February 25, 1985.
C.A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 238 U. S. App. D.C. 309, 740 F. 2d 980.
holding that a "but for" damage model is "fatally deficient" where it provides "no basis for the Court to determine without speculation the amount of damage, if any, caused by any of the particular actions of the defendants"
Summary of this case from Rossi v. Standard Roofing, Inc.rejecting use of fully distributed cost in favor of average incremental cost
Summary of this case from Ortho Diagnostic Sys. v. Abbott Lab.noting that because plaintiff was a California resident, California courts would be more accessible to him
Summary of this case from Federal Deposit Insurance v. British-American InsuranceFull title:SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMMUNICATIONS Co. et al. v. AMERICAN TELEPHONE TELEGRAPH…
Court:U.S.
Date published: Feb 25, 1985
PUH asserts that the cases cited by the appellee are not applicable to the facts in the instant case. See…
Gen. Dynamics Corp. v. Am. Tel. Tel.United States v. AT T, 552 F. Supp. 131 (D.D.C. 1982), aff'd, 460 U.S. 1001, 103 S.Ct. 1240, 75 L.Ed.2d 472…