Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Amicus Brief In Support Of Motion For Reconsideration, In The Case Of Murray V. Chagrin Valley Publishing Co., Case No. 2015-0127, Supreme Court Of Ohio, David Forte
Law Faculty Briefs and Court Documents
Forte authored an Amicus brief in support of motion for reconsideration, in the case of Murray v. Chagrin Valley Publishing Co., Case no. 2015-0127, Supreme Court of Ohio, on issues dealing with free speech and libel. The brief was filed on July 20, 2015. In the brief, Forte writes, 'I have chosen to participate as an amicus curiae in support of the Motion for Reconsideration filed by Appellants Robert E. Murray, Murray Energy Corporation, American Energy Corporation, and The Ohio Valley Coal Company because as a career constitutional scholar, I believe that Appellants’ case presents questions of keen interest to …
Brief Of Antitrust Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Appellees, Supporting Affirmance, Chris Sagers, K. Craig Wildfang, Ryan W. Marth, David Martinez
Brief Of Antitrust Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Appellees, Supporting Affirmance, Chris Sagers, K. Craig Wildfang, Ryan W. Marth, David Martinez
Law Faculty Briefs and Court Documents
Amici urge affirmance for three principal reasons. First, we elaborate a point to dispel Appellant's suggestion that antitrust somehow does not belong here. Second, we show that ordinary rule of reason treatment was appropriate. Relying rather daringly on a case that it overwhelmingly lost, Appellant asks this Court to find within NCAA v. Board of Regents of Univ. of Okla., 468 U. S. 85 (1984), a rule that its "amateurism" or "eligibility" restraints are "valid...as a matter of law." NCAA Br. at 14, 22. Board of Regents did not say that, and even Appellant's own amici admit it. See Wilson …