U.S. Code » Title 15 » Chapter CHAPTER 1— MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE

15 U.S.C. § 36

Recovery of damages, etc., for antitrust violations on claim against person based on official action directed by local government, or official or employee thereof acting in an official capacity

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Prohibition in general

No damages, interest on damages, costs or attorney’s fees may be recovered under section 4, 4A, or 4C of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 15, 15a, or 15c) in any claim against a person based on any official action directed by a local government, or official or employee thereof acting in an official capacity.

(b) Nonapplication of prohibition for cases commenced before effective date of provisions

Subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to cases commenced before the effective date of this Act.

(Pub. L. 98–544, § 4, Oct. 24, 1984, 98 Stat. 2750.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

For effective date of this Act, referred to in subsec. (b), see Effective Date note below.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective thirty days before Oct. 24, 1984, see section 6 of Pub. L. 98–544, set out as a note under section 34 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1986–2021 · leading case: GF Gaming Corp. v. City of Black Hawk, 405 F.3d 876 (10th Cir. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
GF Gaming Corp. v. City of Black Hawk, 405 F.3d 876 (10th Cir. 2005). “Like the Black Hawk officials, however, these defendants are nevertheless immune from monetary liability under the LGAA.”
Capital Freight Servs., Inc. v. Trailer Marine Transp. Corp., 704 F. Supp. 1190 (S.D.N.Y. 1989). · cites it 3× “” 15 U.S.C. § 36 (a). I conclude that the LGAA bars antitrust damages against PRMSA but not necessarily against TMT and PRMMI.”
MacArthur v. San Juan Cnty., 416 F. Supp. 2d 1098 (D. Utah 2005). “” 15 U.S.C. § 36 (a). Federal courts are thus precluded “from awarding monetary relief on antitrust claims brought against local govern *1173 ment entities.”
Crosby v. Hosp. Auth. of Valdosta & Lowndes Cnty., 93 F.3d 1515 (11th Cir. 1996). “The LGAA provides, in relevant part: *1536 15 U.S.C.A. § 36 (a). Section 4 of the Clayton Act provides the damages remedy for violations of the Sherman Act; thus, it applies to Dr.”
Bloom v. Hennepin Cnty., 783 F. Supp. 418 (D. Minn. 1992). “” 15 U.S.C. § 36 (a). This section applies principles of state action immunity to the conduct of local governmental authorities in directing the actions of nongovernmental parties.”
City Commc'ns, Inc. v. City of Detroit, 660 F. Supp. 932 (E.D. Mich. 1987). “15 U.S.C. § 36 . Legislative history indicates that Congress intended that Parker and its progeny should be used to interpret this section.”
Cohn v. Bond, 953 F.2d 154 (4th Cir. 1991). · cites it 2× “15 U.S.C. § 36 . The appellant does not appeal the determination by the district court that Wilkes Hospital is a local governmental unit covered by the LGAA.”
United States Football League v. Nat'l Football League, 634 F. Supp. 1155 (S.D.N.Y. 1986). “Although the LGAA bars recovery of damages under the antitrust laws "in any claim against a person based on any official action directed by a local government, or official or employee thereof acting in an official capacity," 15 U.”
City Commc'ns, Inc. v. City of Detroit, 650 F. Supp. 1570 (E.D. Mich. 1987). “As to the private defendants, the Local Government Antitrust Act states: No damages, interest on damages, costs or attorneys’ fees may be recovered under Section 15, 15a, or 15c of this title in any claim against a person based on any official action directed by the local…”
Lamminen v. City of Cloquet, 987 F. Supp. 723 (D. Minn. 1997). “Finally, the City asserts it is entitled to summary judgment on the Sherman Act claims pursuant to the Local Government *734 Antitrust Act (“LGAA”), 15 U.S.C. § 36 (a), which provides immunity for any person for a claim based upon any official action directed by a local…”
Wellwoods Dev. Co. v. City of Aurora, 631 F. Supp. 221 (N.D. Ill. 1986). “Lumanair later submitted a separate Memorandum asserting 15 U.S.C. § 36 (part of the Local Government Antitrust Act of 1984) required dismissal.”
Wicker v. Union Cnty. Gen. Hosp., 673 F. Supp. 177 (N.D. Miss. 1987). “The court also finds that the hospital and its board of trustees in their official capacity are immune from damages under 15 U.S.C. § 36 (a). Claims against the members of the board in their individual capacity are precluded by the finding of the Chancery Court of Union County…”
Show all 20 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.