green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
4.0 score
“neither the aims of intellectual property law, nor the antitrust laws justify allowing a monopolist to rely upon a pretextual business justification to mask anticompeti-tive conduct.”
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Microsoft Corp.
neither the aims of intellectual property law, nor the antitrust laws justify allowing a monopolist to rely upon a pretextual business justification to mask anticompeti-tive conduct.
discussed
Cited "see"
John M. Oglesby and Lois P. Oglesby v. Delaware & Hudson Railway Company, General Motors Corporation
See Springston v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 130 F.3d 241, 245 (6th Cir.1997), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1560 , 140 L.Ed.2d 792 (1998); Marshall v. Burlington N., Inc., 720 F.2d 1149, 1153 (9th Cir.1983).
cited
Cited "see"
At & T CORP. v. City of Portland
See Image Technical Servs., Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 125 F.3d 1195 , 1210 (9th Cir.1997), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1560 , 140 L.Ed.2d 792 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see"
Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. v. City of Lodi, Cal.
See Cullinan v. Abramson, 128 F.3d 301, 310 (6th Cir.1997), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1560 , 140 L.Ed.2d 792 (1998) ("[T]he rationales for qualified immunity apply to [private] lawyers and their firm in about the same way they apply to [the government attorney]”). 6 .
cited
Cited "see"
Bristol Technology, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.
See Image Technical Services, Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 125 F.3d 1195, 1204 (9th Cir.1997), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1560 , 140 L.Ed.2d 792 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see"
Charles H. Wilson Geraldine E. Wilson Raquel Wilson, Next Friend/mother of Valencia Snowden, a Minor v. Harry Layne, Deputy, United States Marshal, Supervisor for the Washington Area, Operation Gunsmoke Joseph L. Perkins James A. Olivo, and Raymond M. Kight, Sheriff, Montgomery County, Maryland John Doe, Unknown Sheriff's Deputies John Doe, Unknown U.S. Marshals United States of America Eric E. Runion Mark A. Collins Brian E. Roynestad, Charles H. Wilson Geraldine E. Wilson Raquel Wilson, Next Friend/mother of Valencia Snowden, a Minor v. Mark A. Collins Eric E. Runion Brian E. Roynestad, and Raymond M. Kight, Sheriff, Montgomery County, Maryland John Doe, Unknown Sheriff's Deputies Harry Layne, Deputy, United States Marshal, Supervisor for the Washington Area, Operation Gunsmoke John Doe, Unknown U.S. Marshals United States of America Joseph L. Perkins James A. Olivo
The law is clearly established such that an officer's conduct transgresses a bright line when the law has "been authoritatively decided by the Supreme Court, the appropriate United States Court of Appeals, or the highest court of the state." Wallace v. King, 626 F.2d 1157, 1161 (4th Cir.1980); see Cullinan v. Abramson, 128 F.3d 301, 311 (6th Cir.1997) (explaining that "[o]rdinarily, at least, in determining whether a right is 'clearly established' this court will not look beyond Supreme Court and Sixth Circuit precedent"), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 118 S.Ct. 1560 , 140 L.Ed.2d 792 (1998); J…
discussed
Cited "see"
Wilson v. Layne
The law is clearly established such that an officer’s conduct transgresses a bright line when the law has “been authoritatively decided by the Supreme Court, the appropriate United States Court of Appeals, or the highest court of the state.” Wallace v. King, 626 F.2d 1157 , 1161 (4th Cir.1980); see Cullinan v. Abramson, 128 F.3d 301, 311 (6th Cir. 1997) (explaining that “[o]rdinarily, at least, in determining whether a right is ‘clearly established’ this court will not look beyond Supreme Court and Sixth Circuit precedent”), ce rt. denied, — U.S.-, 118 S.Ct. 1560 , 140 L.Ed.2d …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Arizona, Dept. of Law, Civil Rights Div. v. Asarco
See, e.g., Schudel v. General Electric Co., 120 F.3d 991, 996 (9th Cir.1997) (requiring a new trial where inadmissible evidence was the only evidence on the issue of causation), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1094 , 118 S.Ct. 1560 , 1561, 140 L.Ed.2d 792 (1998), abrogated on other grounds, Weisgram v. Marley Co., 528 U.S. 440 , 120 S.Ct. 1011 , 145 L.Ed.2d 958 (2000); Powell v. Levit, 640 F.2d 239, 241 (9th Cir.1981) (holding that the Rule 61 prejudice standard was met where the erroneously admitted evidence of the plaintiffs juvenile and adult felony offenses was clearly prejudicial, because the case…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Gonzalez v. Lee County Housing Authority
See Lussier v. Dugger, 904 F.2d 661 , 663-64, 670 n. 10 (11th Cir.1990) (the Rehabilitation Act of 1973); see also Cullinan v. Abramson, 128 F.3d 301 , 307-12 (6th Cir.1997) (the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1560 , 140 L.Ed.2d 792 (1998); Torcasio v. Murray, 57 F.3d 1340 , 1343 (4th Cir.1995) (the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973); Lue v. Moore, 43 F.3d 1203 , 1205 (8th Cir.1994) (the Rehabilitation Act of 1973); McGregor v. Louisiana State Univ.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Luz Gonzalez v. Lee County Housing Authority
No. 721 (1968), reprinted in 1968 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1837 (concerning relevant public law, but not addressing § 3617) 33 See Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 814 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2736 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) (stating that qualified immunity is necessary to avoid "the expenses of litigation, the diversion of official energy from pressing public issues, and the deterrence of able citizens from acceptance of public office") 34 See Lussier v. Dugger, 904 F.2d 661 , 663-64, 670 n. 10 (11th Cir.1990) (the Rehabilitation Act of 1973); see also Cullinan v. Abramson, 128 F.3d 301 , 307-12 (6th Cir.1997)…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SERVICE DELI INC., Defendant-Appellant
See, e.g., Image Technical Services, Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 125 F.3d 1195, 1213 (9th Cir.1997), cert. denied, - U.S.-, 118 S.Ct. 1560 , 140 L.Ed.2d 792 (1998); United States v. Ramos-Oseguera, 120 F.3d 1028, 1037 (9th Cir.1997), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1094 , 140 L.Ed.2d 149 (1998).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States
v.
New York Life Insurance Co.
v.
New York Life Insurance Co.
No. 97-1229.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 27, 1998.
Published
Citer courts: District of Columbia (1) · N.D. Illinois (1)
C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.