Search the opinions of the US Supreme Court

Find lawyers in the LII Lawyer Directory

Your query ANTITRUST or MONOPOLIES returned 35 results.

	SLAUGHTERHOUSE CASES [Dissent]
	PROPRIETORS OF CHARLES RIVER BRIDGE V. PROPRIETORS OF WARREN BRIDGE [Dissent]
	SLAUGHTERHOUSE CASES [Dissent]
	STANDARD OIL CO. OF NEW JERSEY V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	A. L. A. SCHECHTER POULTRY CORP. V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	STANDARD OIL CO. OF NEW JERSEY V. UNITED STATES [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	UNITED STATES V. E. C. KNIGHT COMPANY [Dissent]
	STANDARD OIL CO. OF NEW JERSEY V. UNITED STATES [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	UNITED STATES V. E. C. KNIGHT COMPANY [Syllabus]
	NORTHERN SECURITIES CO. V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	BATES V. STATE BAR OF ARIZONA [Opinion]
	NORTHERN SECURITIES CO. V. UNITED STATES [Dissent]
	JACKSON V. METROPOLITAN EDISON CO. [Opinion]
	JACKSON V. METROPOLITAN EDISON CO. [Dissent]
	STANDARD OIL CO. OF NEW JERSEY V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus]
	SLAUGHTERHOUSE CASES [Opinion]
	SWIFT AND COMPANY V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	BELL ATLANTIC CORP. V. TWOMBLY [Syllabus]
	A. L. A. SCHECHTER POULTRY CORP. V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus]
	CENTRAL HUDSON GAS & ELEC. CORP. V. PUBLIC SERVICE COMM'N [Dissent]
	NEBBIA V. NEW YORK [Opinion]
	C & A CARBONE, INC. V. TOWN OF CLARKSTOWN [Dissent]
	UNITED STATES V. E. C. KNIGHT COMPANY [Opinion]
	EVERSON V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF EWING [Opinion]
	LOEWE V. LAWLOR [Opinion]
	AT&T CORP. V. IOWA UTILITIES BD., 525 U.S. 366 (1999) [Syllabus]
	NEW YORK V. FERC [Syllabus] FERC did not exceed its jurisdiction when it required electric utilities that "unbundle"-i.e., separate-transmission costs from electricity costs when billing their retail consumers to transmit competitors' electricity over their lines on the same terms that the utilities apply to their own transmissions; and FERC's decision not to impose that requirement on utilities that offer only "bundled" retail sales was a permissible policy choice.
	ELDRED V. ASHCROFT [Syllabus] The Copyright Term Extension Act, which enlarges the duration of existing and future copyrights by 20 years, does not exceed Congress' power under the Constitution's Copyright Clause and does not violate the First Amendment.
	GENERAL MOTORS CORP. V. TRACY, TAX COMM'R OF OHIO, 519 U.S. 278 (1997). [Syllabus]
	PROPRIETORS OF CHARLES RIVER BRIDGE V. PROPRIETORS OF WARREN BRIDGE [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	MILLER V. CALIFORNIA [Dissent]
	MIAMI HERALD PUBLISHING CO. V. TORNILLO [Opinion]
	NORTHERN SECURITIES CO. V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus]
	PROPRIETORS OF CHARLES RIVER BRIDGE V. PROPRIETORS OF WARREN BRIDGE [Opinion]
	WALZ V. TAX COMM'N OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK [Dissent]
	HAMMER V. DAGENHART [Dissent]
	NORTHERN SECURITIES CO. V. UNITED STATES [Concurrence]
	MUNN V. ILLINOIS [Opinion]
	CENTRAL HUDSON GAS & ELEC. CORP. V. PUBLIC SERVICE COMM'N [Opinion]
	ADAMSON V. CALIFORNIA [Dissent]
	NORTHERN SECURITIES CO. V. UNITED STATES [Dissent]
	BELL ATLANTIC CORP. V. TWOMBLY [Syllabus]
	POSTAL SERVICE V. FLAMINGO INDUSTRIES (USA) LTD. [Syllabus] The federal antitrust laws apply to a person, which is defined to include corporations and associations existing under or authorized by the laws of * * * the United States. 15 U.S.C.7 (sherman Act), 12 (a) (Clayton Act). The question presented is whether the United States Postal Service is a person amenable to suit under the antitrust laws.
	CREDIT SUISSE SECURITIES (USA) LLC V. BILLING [Syllabus]
	BROWN V. PRO FOOTBALL, INC.., 518 U.S. 231 (1996) [Syllabus]
	VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. V. LAW OFFICESOF CURTIS V. TRINKO, LLP [Syllabus] 1. Whether allegations of inadequacies in a monopolist's affirmative assistance to its rivals, including resellers—as newly provided by incumbent local telephone companies under the Telecommunications Act of 1996—state a claim for unlawful unilateral predatory conduct under Section 2 of the Sherman Act 2. Whether antitrust and Communications Act standing extends to indirect purchasers, I.e., the customers of the defendant's customer, asserting injuries wholly derivative of the direct customer's injury, even when invoking only the direct customer's legal rights.
	KANSAS ET AL. V UTILICORP UNITED, INC., 497 U.S. 199 (1990) [Syllabus]
	BE&K CONSTR. CO. V. NLRB [Syllabus] Respondent National Labor Relations Board lacked authority to find that petitioner violated federal labor law by prosecuting against respondent unions an unsuccessful lawsuit with a retaliatory motive.
	[Syllabus]
	LEEGIN CREATIVE LEATHER PRODUCTS, INC. V.PSKS, INC. [Syllabus]
	F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD. V. EMPAGRAN S.A. [Syllabus] (1) Whether under the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act of 1982 (FTAIA), 15 U.S.C. § 6a, the Sherman Act applies to claims of foreign plaintiffs whose injuries do not arise from the effects of antitrust violations on United States commerce? (2) Whether such foreign plaintiffs lack antitrust standing under Section 4 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 15(a)?
	STATE OIL CO. V. KHAN, 522 U.S. 3 (1997) [Syllabus]
	KLEHR ET UX. V. A. O. SMITH CORP., 117 S.CT. 1984, 138 L.ED.2D 373 (1997). [Syllabus]
	COLUMBIA V. OMNI OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, INC., 499 U.S. 365 (1991) [Syllabus]
	FEDERAL TRADE COMM'N V. TICOR TITLE INS., 504 U.S. 621 (1992). [Syllabus]
	INTEL CORP. V. ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. [Syllabus]
	SMALL V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	VOLVO TRUCKS NORTH AMERICA, INC. V. REEDER-SIMCO GMC, INC. [Syllabus]
	GILMER V. INTERSTATE/JOHNSON LANE CORP., 500 U.S. 20 (1991) [Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. UNITED FOODS, INC. [Syllabus] The Mushroom Promotion, Research, and Consumer Information Act's requirement that fresh mushroom handlers pay assessments used primarily to fund advertising promoting mushroom sales violates the First Amendment.
	NYNEX CORP. V. DISCON, INC. [Syllabus]
	GLICKMAN V. WILEMAN BROTHERS & ELLIOTT, INC., 117 S.CT. 2130, 138 L.ED.2D (1997) [Syllabus]
	HARTFORD FIRE INS. V. CALIFORNIA, 509 U.S. 764 (1993). [Syllabus]
	TEXACO, INC. V. HASBROUCK, 496 U.S. 543 (1990) [Syllabus]
	WEYERHAEUSER CO. V. ROSS-SIMMONS HARDWOODLUMBER CO. [Syllabus]
	NORFOLK AND WESTERN R. CO. V. TRAIN DISPATCHERS ASSOCIATION, 499 U.S. 117 (1991) [Syllabus]
	NEW YORK V. FERC [Syllabus] FERC did not exceed its jurisdiction when it required electric utilities that "unbundle"-i.e., separate-transmission costs from electricity costs when billing their retail consumers to transmit competitors' electricity over their lines on the same terms that the utilities apply to their own transmissions; and FERC's decision not to impose that requirement on utilities that offer only "bundled" retail sales was a permissible policy choice.
	AT&T CORP. V. IOWA UTILITIES BD., 525 U.S. 366 (1999) [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	CEDRIC KUSHNER PROMOTIONS, LTD. V. KING [Syllabus] The RICO provision forbidding "any person employed by or associated with any enterprise . . . to conduct or participate . . . in the conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity," 18 U. S. C. §1962(c), applies when a corporate employee unlawfully conducts the affairs of the corporation of which he is the sole owner-whether he conducts those affairs within the scope, or beyond the scope, of corporate authority.
	CAMPS NEWFOUND/OWATONNA, INC. V. TOWN OF HARRISON, 520 U.S. 564 (1997) [Syllabus]
	GENERAL MOTORS CORP. V. TRACY, TAX COMM'R OF OHIO, 519 U.S. 278 (1997). [Syllabus]
	TURNER BROADCASTING SYSTEM, INC. V. F.C.C., 520 U.S. 180 (1997) [Syllabus]
	HOLMES V. SECS. INVESTOR PROTECTION CORP., 503 U.S. 258 (1992). [Syllabus]
	ELDRED V. ASHCROFT [Syllabus] The Copyright Term Extension Act, which enlarges the duration of existing and future copyrights by 20 years, does not exceed Congress' power under the Constitution's Copyright Clause and does not violate the First Amendment.