holding that the plaintiff could not recover unless it established that the defendant's actions were motivated by malice toward the plaintiff rather than by the presence of its own economic interests
Summary of this case from Metropolitan Entertainment Co., v. KoplikNo. 88-111.
October 3, 1988, October TERM, 1988.
C.A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 840 F. 2d 678.
holding that the plaintiff could not recover unless it established that the defendant's actions were motivated by malice toward the plaintiff rather than by the presence of its own economic interests
Summary of this case from Metropolitan Entertainment Co., v. KoplikFull title:AUSTIN ET AL. v. CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU
Court:U.S.
Date published: Oct 3, 1988
In order to insure ongoing judicial supervision of the FBI's electronic surveillance practices, the Wiretap…
Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating Corp.Colt argues that boycotts are illegal per se only if they are used to enforce agreements that are themselves…