77 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 243,773 times 39 Legal Analyses
Holding that summary judgment is appropriate when the evidence is "so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law"
Brown Shoe Co. v. United States
370 U.S. 294 (1962) Cited 1,863 times 34 Legal Analyses
Holding judgment final and appealable where district court passed on every prayer for relief in the complaint and ordered full divestiture of stock, although court had not yet approved a divestiture plan
In re Tobacco II Cases
46 Cal.4th 298 (Cal. 2009) Cited 1,238 times 35 Legal Analyses
Holding class representatives had standing to challenge common marketing of cigarettes despite differences in the advertisements or statements on which class members relied
American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Central Office Telephone, Inc.
524 U.S. 214 (1998) Cited 368 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the “respondent's state-law claims are barred by the filed rate doctrine”
McKell v. Washington Mutual Inc.
142 Cal.App.4th 1457 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) Cited 720 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a loan transaction is a business practice under the UCL
Marcus v. AT&T Corp.
138 F.3d 46 (2d Cir. 1998) Cited 918 times
Holding that claim alleging breach of contract in which carrier agreed to charge plaintiff different rate than that set forth in tariff did not raise substantial federal question, but contract could not be enforced due to filed-rate doctrine
Stutman v. Chemical Bank
95 N.Y.2d 24 (N.Y. 2000) Cited 785 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that statutory consumer-fraud claims do "not require proof of actual reliance," but do require causation
Rubio v. Capital One Bank
613 F.3d 1195 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 409 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that closing a credit card account and losing the credit extended by the bank and/or keeping an account open and accepting a higher APR would result in economic injury sufficient for UCL standing
Broadcom v. Qualcomm
501 F.3d 297 (3d Cir. 2007) Cited 275 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding that a deceptive FRAND commitment to a SSO may constitute actionable anticompetitive conduct under the Sherman Act
California v. American Stores Co.
495 U.S. 271 (1990) Cited 127 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that a statute entitling a party to “have injunctive relief” entitles parties to both prohibitory and mandatory injunctions under the “traditional principles of equity”
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 339,855 times 162 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Rule 30 - Depositions by Oral Examination
Fed. R. Civ. P. 30 Cited 17,127 times 138 Legal Analyses
Upholding a district court's decision not to consider the plaintiff's deposition errata sheets in opposition to a motion for summary judgment when they were untimely
Section 75-1.1 - Methods of competition, acts and practices regulated; legislative policy
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 Cited 2,057 times 111 Legal Analyses
Declaring unlawful "unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce"
Section 18 - Acquisition by one corporation of stock of another
15 U.S.C. § 18 Cited 1,554 times 52 Legal Analyses
Barring an acquisition "where in any line of commerce ... the effect of such acquisition may be substantially to lessen competition"
Section 26 - Injunctive relief for private parties; exception; costs
15 U.S.C. § 26 Cited 1,490 times 2 Legal Analyses
Seeking injunctive relief
Section 203 - Schedules of charges
47 U.S.C. § 203 Cited 373 times 1 Legal Analyses
Establishing what is popularly known as the "filed-rate doctrine"
Section 50-627 - Unconscionable acts and practices
Kan. Stat. § 50-627 Cited 182 times 2 Legal Analyses
Defining "[u]nconscionability" for purposes of the statute
Section 18a - Premerger notification and waiting period
15 U.S.C. § 18a Cited 160 times 120 Legal Analyses
Exempting from antitrust laws "transactions specifically exempted from the antitrust laws by Federal statute"
Section 1.1206 - Permit-but-disclose proceedings
47 C.F.R. § 1.1206 Cited 6 times
Stating that " ex parte presentations . . . to or from Commission decision-making personnel are permissible . . . provided that [they] . . . are disclosed"

Blessing v. Sirius XM Radio Inc.

77 Cited authorities

Holding that summary judgment is appropriate when the evidence is "so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law"

Holding judgment final and appealable where district court passed on every prayer for relief in the complaint and ordered full divestiture of stock, although court had not yet approved a divestiture plan

Holding class representatives had standing to challenge common marketing of cigarettes despite differences in the advertisements or statements on which class members relied

Holding that the “respondent's state-law claims are barred by the filed rate doctrine”

Holding that a loan transaction is a business practice under the UCL

Holding that claim alleging breach of contract in which carrier agreed to charge plaintiff different rate than that set forth in tariff did not raise substantial federal question, but contract could not be enforced due to filed-rate doctrine

Holding that statutory consumer-fraud claims do "not require proof of actual reliance," but do require causation

Holding that closing a credit card account and losing the credit extended by the bank and/or keeping an account open and accepting a higher APR would result in economic injury sufficient for UCL standing

Holding that a deceptive FRAND commitment to a SSO may constitute actionable anticompetitive conduct under the Sherman Act

Holding that a statute entitling a party to “have injunctive relief” entitles parties to both prohibitory and mandatory injunctions under the “traditional principles of equity”

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Upholding a district court's decision not to consider the plaintiff's deposition errata sheets in opposition to a motion for summary judgment when they were untimely

Declaring unlawful "unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce"

Barring an acquisition "where in any line of commerce ... the effect of such acquisition may be substantially to lessen competition"

Seeking injunctive relief

Establishing what is popularly known as the "filed-rate doctrine"

Defining "[u]nconscionability" for purposes of the statute

Exempting from antitrust laws "transactions specifically exempted from the antitrust laws by Federal statute"

Stating that " ex parte presentations . . . to or from Commission decision-making personnel are permissible . . . provided that [they] . . . are disclosed"