green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
9.3 score
“some concerted effort at a single market level - a horizontal combination or agreement - is requisite before the type of per se violation commonly termed a 'group boycott' can be found to exist”
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1983
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 29 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Carol Conklin v. Leo E. Lovely Joe W. Wakeley and John Huss
(2×)
ojnce the plaintiff establishes that his discharge resulted from constitutionally impermissible motives, he is presumed to be entitled to reinstatement.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Drs. Steuer & Latham, P.A. v. National Medical Enterprises, Inc.
some concerted effort at a single market level - a horizontal combination or agreement - is requisite before the type of per se violation commonly termed a 'group boycott' can be found to exist
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Marcus Holley v. The Seminole County School District
(2×)
Id. at 265.
discussed
Cited "see"
First American Corporation v. Price Waterhouse Llp
See Fonseca v. Regan, 734 F.2d 944, 948 (2d Cir.1984) ("[W]here the information sought is not properly discoverable, it is axiomatic that a district court should not impose a Rule 37 sanction for a party's failure to comply with an order to reveal such information."), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 882 , 105 S.Ct. 249 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984). 34 Given these safeguards, we find entirely reasonable the district court's determination that the U.S. interest in this lawsuit outweighs the competing foreign interests in enforcement of local confidentiality laws.
discussed
Cited "see"
First American Corp. v. Price Waterhouse LLP
See Fonseca v. Regan, 734 F.2d 944, 948 (2d Cir.1984) (“[W]here the information sought is not properly discoverable, it is axiomatic that a district court should not impose a Rule 37 sanction for a party’s failure to comply with an order to reveal such information.”), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 882 , 105 S.Ct. 249 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Great Western Directories, Inc. v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.
See Professional Ass’n of College Educators v. El Paso County Community College Dist., 730 F.2d 258, 274 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
G & W, INC. v. East Rutherford Bor.
See Fine v. Barry and Enright Productions, 731 F. 2d 1394, 1397 (9th *514 Cir.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed. 2d 186 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Dawn Mcmillan v. State Mutual Life Assurance Company Of America
See Fine v. Barry and Enright Productions, 731 F.2d 1394, 1397 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
McMillan v. State Mutual Life Assurance Co. of America
See Fine v. Barry and Enright Productions, 731 F.2d 1394, 1397 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc.
See Fonesca v. Regan, 734 F.2d 944 , 950 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 882 , 105 S.Ct. 249 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984); see also Texas & P.R.
discussed
Cited "see"
Dr. Donald J. Barry and Dr. Bert Hassler v. Blue Cross of California
See Fine v. Barry and Enright Productions, 731 F.2d 1394, 1398 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984); cf. Dahl, Inc. v. Roy Cooper Co., 448 F.2d 17, 19-20 (9th Cir.1971).
cited
Cited "see"
Multi-State Communications, Inc. v. United States
See Brontel, Ltd. v. City of New York, 571 F.Supp. 1065, 1067-68 (S.D.N.Y.1983), aff'd mem., 742 F.2d 1439 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 882 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hsu ex rel. Chin-Ching Hsu v. Roslyn Union Free School District No. 3
See also Professional Ass’n of College Educators v. El Paso County Community College Dist., 730 F.2d 258, 273 (5th Cir.) (examining the record after district court issued injunctive ruling without making "express findings of fact"), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Roslyn Union Free School District No. 3 v. Hsu
See also Professional Ass'n of College Educators v. El Paso County Community College Dist., 730 F.2d 258, 273 (5th Cir.) (examining the record after district court issued injunctive ruling without making "express findings of fact"), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. 25 Cases, More Or Less, Of An Article Of Device
See, e.g., United States v. Article of Device, 731 F.2d 1253 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 882 , 105 S.Ct. 249 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984) (radiation detector used to locate problem areas of body on which chiropractors will concentrate qualifies as device); United States v. Articles of Device, etc., 481 F.2d 434, 437 (10th Cir.1973) (galvanometer used to indicate diseased state by measuring electric current running through patient's body constitutes device).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. 25 Cases, More or Less, of an Article of Device
See, e.g., United States v. Article of Device, 731 F.2d 1253 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 882 , 105 S.Ct. 249 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984) (radiation detector used to locate problem areas of body on which chiropractors will concentrate qualifies as device); United States v. Articles of Device, etc., 481 F.2d 434, 437 (10th Cir.1973) (galvanometer used to indicate diseased state by measuring electric current running through patient’s body constitutes device).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bubis v. Blanton
See also Fine v. Barry & Enright Prod., 731 F.2d 1394 (9th Cir.) (student who applied to appear on six game shows and who appeared on three game shows had standing to bring antitrust suit), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984); Hecht v. Pro-Football, Inc., 570 F.2d 982, 987 (D.C.Cir.1977) (a manifestation of intention to enter business and a demonstrated preparedness to do so is sufficient to establish standing), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 3069 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1121 (1978). 14 Appellees admit that the Huron Valley standards are appropriate for determining t…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bubis v. Blanton
See also Fine v. Barry & Enright Prod., 731 F.2d 1394 (9th Cir.) (student who applied to appear on six game shows and who appeared on three game shows had standing to bring antitrust suit), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984); Hecht v. Pro-Football, Inc., 570 F.2d 982, 987 (D.C.Cir.1977) (a manifestation of intention to enter business and a demonstrated preparedness to do so is sufficient to establish standing), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 3069 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1121 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mark B. Harmon v. Richard L. Thornburgh, Attorney General of the United States
(2×)
See also Professional Ass’n of College Educators v. El Paso County Community College District, 730 F.2d 258, 273-74 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984); Zepeda v. United States I.N.S., 753 F.2d 719 , 728 n. 1 (9th Cir.1983); id. at 733-34 (dissenting opinion); Gregory v. Litton Sys., Inc., 472 F.2d 631, 633-34 (9th Cir.1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Stellmaker v. DePetrillo
See Gavrilles v. O’Connor, 579 F.Supp. 301 (D.Mass.1984) (“Gavrilles I”); see also Professional Ass’n of College Educators v. El Paso County Community College, 730 F.2d 258 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984) (recognizing protection for filing grievances); cf. McDonald v. Smith, 472 U.S. 479, 484-85 , 105 S.Ct. 2787 , 86 L.Ed.2d 384 (1985) (petition to government entitled to only qualified immunity from libel suit; noting standard identical to that for other first amendment expression).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. 22 Rectangular or Cylindrical Finished Devices
See e.g., United States v. An Article of Device, Toftness Radiation Detector, 731 F.2d 1253, 1256-58 (7th Cir.), cert. denied 469 U.S. 882 , 105 S.Ct. 249 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984) (litigated enforcement proceeding in which the court specifically considered whether a certain chiropractic instrument was a device even though there was no prior administrative proceeding to “classify” the instrument as a device); United States v. An Article of Device Consisting of 1,217 Cardboard Boxes, 607 F.Supp. 990 (W.D.Mich.1985) (in considering the same allegations of misbranding and adulterating present i…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rutman Wine Company v. E. & J. Gallo Winery
See also Fine v. Barry and Enright Productions, 731 F.2d 1394 (9th Cir.), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984); Cascade Cabinet Co. v. Western Cabinet and Millwork, 710 F.2d 1366 (9th Cir.1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Richards v. Neilsen Freight Lines
Seagram & Sons, Inc. v. Hawaiian Oke & Liquors, Ltd., 416 F.2d 71, 85 (9th Cir.1969), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 1062 , 90 S.Ct. 752 , 24 L.Ed.2d 755 (1970); see also Fine v. Barry and Enright Productions, 731 F.2d 1394, 1398-99 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984) (consciously parallel behavior alone not sufficient to establish conspiracy). 25 We next consider Foothills' allegation that the Union coerced the separate defendants to boycott Foothills, a boycott Foothills claims is per se unlawful.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Richards v. Neilsen Freight Lines
Seagram & Sons, Inc. v. Hawaiian Oke & Liquors, Ltd., 416 F.2d 71, 85 (9th Cir.1969), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 1062 , 90 S.Ct. 752 , 24 L.Ed.2d 755 (1970); see also Fine v. Barry and Enright Productions, 731 F.2d 1394, 1398-99 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 881 , 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984) (consciously parallel behavior alone not sufficient to establish conspiracy).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Banks v. Burkich
See, e.g., Professional Association of College Educators v. El Paso County Community College District, 730 F.2d 258, 268 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984) (hereinafter "PACE ").
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Banks v. Burkich
See, e.g., Professional Association of College Educators v. El Paso County Community College District, 730 F.2d 258, 268 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984) (hereinafter “PACE”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dianne M. Saye v. St. Vrain Valley School District Re-1j and Vicki Ploussard
“Where this line of causation exists, and the principal or superintendent predicated their recommendations on constitutionally impermissible reasons, these reasons become the basis of the decision by the Board members.” Hickman v. Valley Local School District Board of Education, 619 F.2d 606, 610 (6th Cir.1980); see also Professional Association of College Educators v.. El Paso County Community College District, 730 F.2d 258, 266 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 186 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Roberts v. Van Buren Public Schools
Carter v. Kurzejeski, 706 F.2d 835, 838 (8th Cir.1983) (employees held leadership positions in union, filed numerous unfair labor practice complaints, and participated in grievance proceedings); see also Professional Association of College Educators v. El Paso County Community College District, 730 F.2d 258, 262 (5th Cir.) ("[T]he first amendment is violated by state action whose purpose is * * * to intimidate public employees * * * from taking an active part in [union] affairs or to retaliate against those who do.") (footnote omitted), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d 1…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Roberts v. Van Buren Public Schools
Carter v. Kurzejeski, 706 F.2d 835, 838 (8th Cir.1983) (employees held leadership positions in union, filed numerous unfair labor practice complaints, and participated in grievance proceedings); see also Professional Association of College Educators v. El Paso County Community College District, 730 F.2d 258, 262 (5th Cir.) (“[T]he first amendment is violated by state action whose purpose is * * * to intimidate public employees * * * from taking an active part in [union] affairs or to retaliate against those who do.”) (footnote omitted), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 248 , 83 L.Ed.2d …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co.
v.
Barber et ux.
v.
Barber et ux.
No. 84-86.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 9, 1984.
Published
Citer courts: Sixth Circuit (2) · D. South Carolina (1)
Ct. App. Ohio, Stark County. Certiorari denied.