Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Advanced Computer Services v. MAI Systems (1)
- Advanced Health-Care Services Inc. v. Giles Memorial Hospital (1)
- Alaska Airlines Inc. v. United Airlines (1)
- Bank of America National Trust v. Touche Ross & Co. (1)
- Bennett v. Berg (1)
-
- Berkey Photo Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co. (1)
- Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp (1)
- Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat (1)
- Charlotte Telecasters Inc. v. Jefferson-Pilot Corp. (1)
- Clayton Act (1)
- Continental T.V. Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc. (1)
- Estate Construction Co. v. Miller & Smith Holding Co (1)
- FTC (1)
- Federal Trade Commission (1)
- Fineman v. Armstrong World Industries Inc (1)
- HJ Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. (1)
- Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. California (1)
- Higgins v. Medical College of Hampton Roads (1)
- Kerasotes Michigan Theatres Inc. v. National Amusements Inc. (1)
- Lifschultz Fast Freight Inc. v. Consolidated Freightways Corp (1)
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp (1)
- McCarran-Ferguson Act (1)
- North Carolina Electric Membership Corp. v. Carolina Power & Light Co (1)
- Pocahontas Supreme Coal Co. v. Bethlehem Steel (1)
- RICO (1)
- Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act (1)
- Reves v. Ernst & Young (1)
- Robinson-Patman Act (1)
- Russello v. United States (1)
- Sedima SPRL v. Imrex Co (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Rico And The "Operation Or Management" Test: The Potential Chilling Effect On Criminal Prosecutions, Ira H. Raphaelson, Michelle D. Bernard
Rico And The "Operation Or Management" Test: The Potential Chilling Effect On Criminal Prosecutions, Ira H. Raphaelson, Michelle D. Bernard
University of Richmond Law Review
For more than two decades, prosecutors, plaintiffs' lawyers, the civil and criminal defense bar, and the dourts have struggled with the coverage of the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO" or the "Act"). The Supreme Court has interpreted the Act many times in both criminal and civil cases. For the most part, the high Court has applied the mandatory "liberal" interpretation language of the law to expand the scope of the statute in criminal cases. However, in the civil cases considered, the Supreme Court has generally restricted the scope of the Act.
Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Antitrust And Trade Regulation, Michael F. Urbanski, Francis H. Casola
Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Antitrust And Trade Regulation, Michael F. Urbanski, Francis H. Casola
University of Richmond Law Review
Once again this past year, the Fourth Circuit and the federal courts in Virginia proved inhospitable to antitrust plaintiffs. Plaintiffs consistently lost on summary judgment and only one plaintiff survived a motion to dismiss. The only major development in the law in the Fourth Circuit came from the Western District of Virginia where Judge James C. Turk refused to recognize the theory of monopoly leveraging under Section 2 of the Sherman Act.