§Why CasetextPricing

Plaintiff'S Motion In Limine No. 8 For An Order Precluding From Defendant'S Counselfrom Introducing Defendant Marc Greenberg'S Deposition Testimony Into Evidence; Declaration of Atticus N. Wegman; [Proposed] Order

Motion

3 Cited authorities

  1. Greyhound Corp. v. Superior Court

    56 Cal.2d 355 (Cal. 1961)   Cited 293 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Greyhound, the plaintiff in a personal injury suit arising from a car accident sought written statements that had been obtained from witnesses by the defendant's insurance adjusters and investigators.

  2. Monroy v. City of Los Angeles

    164 Cal.App.4th 248 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 58 times
    Finding "[o]verly restrictive limitations on the introduction of evidence" to be an abuse of discretion "if it destroys a plaintiff's evidentiary presentation"

  3. Janich Bros., Inc. v. American Distilling Co.

    570 F.2d 848 (9th Cir. 1978)   Cited 124 times
    In Janich Bros., Inc. v. American Distilling Co., 570 F.2d 848 (9th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 829, 99 S.Ct. 103, 58 L.Ed.2d 122 (1978), we held that to be considered a separate product for the purposes of predatory pricing analysis, "the product must be such that if predatorily priced, rivals are likely to be driven out of the market or excluded, allowing the firm to raise prices."