Search for: "Sherman Specialty Inc" Results 1 - 20 of 21
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Feb 2007, 11:56 am
Specialty Con (ND Ind., Judge Nuechterlein), an 18-page opinion, Judge Flaum writes:After Specialty Construction Brands, Inc. [read post]
18 Apr 2013, 2:17 pm by WOLFGANG DEMINO
Healthsouth Specialty Hospital, Inc dba Healthsouth Dallas Rehab Hospital We express no opinion on whether the use or non-use of a seatbelt for purposes of strapping a wheelchair in a van would fall within any of the three categories because even if the doctrine applies to Sherman's claims, section 74.351 still requires her to file an expert report. [read post]
3 Aug 2010, 5:25 pm by Sheppard Mullin
Exclusive agreements between a hospital and specialty groups of physicians may violate the Sherman Act, just as group boycotts of individual physicians. [read post]
30 Aug 2012, 5:30 am by Howard Ullman
United Airlines, Inc., 948 F.2d 536 (9th Cir. 1991), the Ninth Circuit rejected monopoly leveraging doctrine as an independent theory of liability under the Sherman Act. [read post]
14 Nov 2014, 2:09 pm by David Garcia and Helen C. Eckert
Independence Tube Corp., 467 U.S. 752 (a parent and its wholly-owned subsidiary are incapable of conspiring under Section 1); Texaco Inc. v. [read post]
31 Dec 2009, 7:19 am
The agency wrapped up its challenge to specialty grocer Whole Foods Market, Inc. [read post]
7 Dec 2009, 11:59 am by @ErikJHeels
(Newton, MA; David Platt,, President) Axis Specialty U.s. [read post]
24 May 2011, 5:01 pm by Eric O'Connor
Plaintiff Specialty Tires America (STA) brought antitrust claims against Hoosier Racing, its tire supplier competitor, and Dirt Motor Sports, Inc. d/b/a World Racing Group, a motorsports racing sanctioning body. [read post]
6 Jun 2007, 6:17 pm
  He used the five-factor test for determining whether plaintiffs have antitrust standing articulated by the Supreme Court in Associated Federal Contractors of California, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Feb 2007, 9:47 pm
The case involved a "predatory bidding" claim under § 2 of the Sherman Act. [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 1:21 pm by Barry Barnett
Wendt[15] for refusing to require plaintiffs to go beyond pleading a claim element (loss causation) despite defendants’ argument that certification analysis must address plaintiffs’ ability to prove the element at trial and Archdiocese of Milwaukee Supporting Fund, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Sep 2008, 8:56 pm
Issue: Whether an Arizona commission violated the free speech rights of an anti-abortion organization by denying its application for a specialty “Choose Life” license plate. [read post]