34 Cited authorities

  1. Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc.

    504 U.S. 451 (1992)   Cited 2,287 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "it is clearly reasonable to infer that [the defendant] has market power to raise prices and drive out competition in the aftermarkets" for service and parts despite an undisputed lack of market power in the initial product
  2. Jefferson Parish Hospital Dist. No. 2 v. Hyde

    466 U.S. 2 (1984)   Cited 802 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "any inquiry into the validity of a tying arrangement must focus on the market or markets in which the two products are sold, for that is where the anticompetitive forcing has its impact"
  3. Northern Pac. R. Co. v. United States

    356 U.S. 1 (1958)   Cited 1,394 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Finding market power based on the uniqueness of the owned land
  4. Arizona v. Maricopa County Medical Society

    457 U.S. 332 (1982)   Cited 471 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that price fixing between medical organizations is per se unreasonable
  5. County of Tuolumne v. Sonora Community Hosp

    236 F.3d 1148 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 647 times
    Holding that the Cartwright Act was "modeled after the Sherman Act" and so the analysis "mirrors the analysis under federal law"
  6. Fortner Enterprises v. U.S. Steel

    394 U.S. 495 (1969)   Cited 482 times
    Holding foreclosure of $190,000 in sales was not "paltry or 'insubstantial'"
  7. U.S. v. Microsoft Corp.

    253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001)   Cited 512 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Holding that district courts are not required to conduct evidentiary hearings prior to issuing relief in civil cases when "there are no disputed factual issues regarding the matter of relief
  8. Bogosian v. Gulf Oil Corp.

    561 F.2d 434 (3d Cir. 1977)   Cited 874 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding proof of injury for class certification in a Sherman Act antitrust case is established as long as the nationwide conspiratorially affected prices were higher than they would have been under competitive conditions because then "all members of the class suffered some damage, notwithstanding that there would be variations . . . as to the extent of their damage"
  9. Paladin Associates, Inc. v. Montana Power Co.

    328 F.3d 1145 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 369 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the appellant's failure to develop any challenge to a conclusion by the district court waives the issue
  10. B.F. Goodrich v. Betkoski

    99 F.3d 505 (2d Cir. 1996)   Cited 246 times
    Holding that “a CERCLA plaintiff is not required to prove its case with scientific certainty” and observing that certainty “is not always a realistic goal in environmental science, where certainty can be elusive”
  11. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 345,981 times   922 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
  12. Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200   Cited 17,839 times   315 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting unlawful business practices
  13. Section 1750 - Title of act

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1750   Cited 2,672 times   67 Legal Analyses

    This title may be cited as the Consumers Legal Remedies Act. Ca. Civ. Code § 1750 Added by Stats. 1970, Ch. 1550.

  14. Section 16700 - Cumulative provisions

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 16700   Cited 365 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Banning agreements to restrain trade