Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Annual Survey of Virginia Law (1)
- Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp (1)
- Bristol Steel and Iron Works v. Bethlehem Steel Corp. (1)
- Bruce's Juices v. American Can Co (1)
- Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act (1)
-
- Child Custody Modification Based on A Parent's Non-Marital Cohabitation: Protecting the Best Interests of The Child In Virginia (1)
- Drs. Steur and Latham PA v. National Medical Enter (1)
- FTC (1)
- Federal Trade Commission (1)
- Grunewald v. United States (1)
- Holabird Sports Discounters v. Tennis Tutor (1)
- ITC (1)
- Inc. v. Data General Corp (1)
- International Trade Commission (1)
- Kroger Co. v. Morris: The Diminution of Hearing Officers (1)
- Lessig v. Tidewater Oil (1)
- M&M Medical Supplies & Services Inc. v. Pleasant Valley Hospital (1)
- MC Mfg. Co. v. Texas Foundries (1)
- McCarran-Ferguson Act (1)
- Miranda v. Norton Community Hospital (1)
- Monsanto Co v. Spray-Rite Serv. Corp. (1)
- Montgomery County Ass'n of Realtors Inc. v. Realty Photo Master Corp (1)
- Montgomery County Ass'n of Realtors v. Realty Photo Master Corp. (1)
- Omni Outdoor Advertising v. Columbia Outdoor Advertising (1)
- Parker v. Brown (1)
- Parkway Gallery Furniture v. Kittinger/Pennsylvania House Group (1)
- Products Liability Tort Reform: Why Virginia Should Adopt the Henderson-Twerski Proposed Revision of Section 402A Restatement (Second) of Torts (1)
- Professional Real Estate Investors v. Columbia Pictures Industries (1)
- Public Health Service Act (1)
- Service & Training (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
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
During the past year, Virginia's federal courts published surprisingly few antitrust opinions. These few opinions indicate fact-specific analysis and little significant development to the law. However, the decisions reflect the continued difficulties faced by private antitrust plaintiffs alleging conspiracy claims and criminal antitrust defendants prosecuted for conduct which is illegal per se. Antitrust plaintiffs, however, have enjoyed measured, if only temporary, success. For example, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed a grant of summary judgment against a durable medical equipment company alleging monopolization claims against a hospital and its affiliated medical equipment company. In another …
University Of Richmond Law Review
University Of Richmond Law Review
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.