Antitrust and Trade Regulation Commons^™

Recognition Of The National Football League As A Single Entity Under Section 1 Of The Sherman Act: Implications Of The Consumer Welfare Model, Myron C. Grauer

Michigan Law Review

This article argues that Justice Rehnquist has analyzed the operational structure of the NFL in a manner that is consistent with proper antitrust enforcement policy, and expands upon the view that he espoused. It contends that the NFL is analogous to a law firm partnership, with the teams analogous to departments or partners that can make operating rules for the firm without fear of violating section 1 of the Sherman Act. In arriving at the opposite conclusion, both the Oakland Raiders and NASL courts relied on several cases involving player restraints that presupposed that teams in professional sports leagues, such …

The Scope Of Judicial Review Of Consent Decrees Under The Antitrust Procedures And Penalties Act Of 1974, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

In the wake of this uncertainty, this Note analyzes the proper scope of judicial review of consent decrees. The Note argues that to further the policies embodied in the APP A, courts should undertake intense review of proposed settlements before entering them as final judgments. Both the congressional intent in enacting the APP A and the public's interest in effective enforcement of the antitrust laws support intense judicial review. The Note then demonstrates that the deferential standard that some courts have applied is derived mainly from a case that is inapplicable to the review of consent decrees. Finally, the Note …

Right To Sue Under Section 4 Of The Clayton Act - The Employee Deischarged For Regusal To Participate In The Anitcompetivie Practices Of His Employer: Bichan V. Chemetron Corp. Examined In Light Of Blue Shield V. Mcready, Ralph N. Bryson

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Demonstration: Economic Analysis And Expert Testimony—Plaintiff's Conference, Eleanor M. Fox, Jay Topkis, George A. Hay, Charles B. Renfrew

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This article is a demonstration on the use of economic experts. The demonstration is based loosely on Mobil’s attempted take-over of Marathon Oil Company. However, the oil companies involved here are named Major, which is the second largest oil company in the United States, and Olympic, which is the largest supplier to independents. Any resemblance of Major and Olympic to any other firm, entity or person, living or not, is purely coincidental.

The demonstration is divided into two parts. The first part is the conference. A conference of plaintiff’s team will be followed by a conference of defendant’s team.

Recent Decisions, Timothy J. Peaden, Charles S. Baugh, Marc W. Joseph, Melissa Q. Windham

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Antitrust--Noerr-Pennington Extends Immunity from Sherman Act to Foreign Litigation and Foreign Acts that result in Alleged Antitrust Violations, Coastal States Marketing, Inc. v. Hunt, 694 F.2d 1358 (5th Cir. 1983).

Antitrust--Foreign Import Cartels are Liable under the Sherman Act although domestic export competitors are shielded with a Webb-Pomerene exemption. Daishowa International v. North Coast Export Co., 1982-2 Trade Cas.64,774 (N.D. Cal.).

Controlling Jury Damage Awards In Private Antitrust Suits, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note takes the position that the courts should better control jury manipulation in private antitrust actions. Part One suggests that manipulation is likely in such actions, and argues that this manipulation off ends the legislative judgment reflected in the trebling provision without leading to more equitable results. Part Two presents two complementary proposals to control jury manipulation of treble damage awards. These proposals aim to induce the jury to return accurate awards based on the economic loss actually suffered by the plaintiff.

The Ftc And Pricing: Of Predation And Signaling, George A. Hay

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This paper summarizes and comments on two recent FTC cases. The first case involved accusations of predatory pricing against Borden, the manufacturer of ReaLemon, the dominant brand of reconstituted lemon juice. The second involved price-signaling and other so-called facilitating practices by the four makers of lead-based antiknock compounds.