Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 54 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Continental T. v. Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Continental T. v. Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc. Anchor | green | “the factfinder weighs all of the circumstances of a case in deciding whether a restrictive practice should be prohibited as imposing an unreasonable restraint on competition.” | 24 |
| 2 | National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma | green | “per se rules are invoked when surrounding circumstances make the likelihood of anticompetitive conduct so great as to render unjustified further examination of the challenged conduct.” | 12 |
| 3 | Continental T. v. Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc. | green | “under this rule, the factfinder weighs all of the circumstances of a case in deciding whether a restrictive practice should be prohibited as imposing an unreasonable restraint on competition.” | 9 |
| 4 | Business Electronics Corp. v. Sharp Electronics Corp. | green | “a vertical restraint is not illegal per se unless it includes some agreement on price or price levels.” | 9 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.