From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miller v. U.S.

U.S.
Dec 16, 1985
474 U.S. 1037 (1985)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

holding that "a ubiquitous price differential of some 20-25%" between branded and unbranded services, combined with other Brown Shoe factors, could justify finding a separate market for the unbranded services and thus precluded summary judgment on the issue of market definition

Summary of this case from U.S. Anchor Mfg., Inc. v. Rule Industries, Inc.
See 3 Summaries

Opinion

No. 85-484.

December 16, 1985.

C.A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied. JUSTICE WHITE would grant certiorari, Reported below: 763 F. 2d 133.

Summaries of

Miller v. U.S.

U.S.
Dec 16, 1985
474 U.S. 1037 (1985)

holding that "a ubiquitous price differential of some 20-25%" between branded and unbranded services, combined with other Brown Shoe factors, could justify finding a separate market for the unbranded services and thus precluded summary judgment on the issue of market definition

Summary of this case from U.S. Anchor Mfg., Inc. v. Rule Industries, Inc.

holding that judicial immunity is not lost because of allegations of conspiracy

Summary of this case from Groom v. Fickes

holding that proof of relevant market is prerequisite to success on attempted monopolization claim under Section 2 of Sherman Act

Summary of this case from Total Benifits Services v. Group Insurance Admin., Inc.
Case details for

Miller v. U.S.

Case Details

Full title:MILLER v. UNITED STATES

Court:U.S.

Date published: Dec 16, 1985

Citations

474 U.S. 1037 (1985)

Citing Cases

West Texas Gas v. 297 Gas Co.

Under these circumstances, North Texas had the legal right to persuade or attempt to persuade 297 to exercise…

Warnock v. Pecos County, Texas

Texas judges are entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity for claims asserted against them in their official…

63 Citing Cases