News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Antitrust Provisions › Sherman Act

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

Will the Supreme Court Upend the Jurisdictional Landscape?

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP on

Many defendants with no connection to the jurisdiction in which they are sued may assert a personal jurisdiction defense to avoid defending against claims in far-flung courts. In cases brought under state law, this defense is...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Antitrust Burden Heightened in Fourth Circuit for Prosecutors in Hybrid Horizontal-Vertical Relationships

Troutman Pepper Locke on

Last week, the Supreme Court declined cert for the Fourth Circuit’s Brewbaker decision, leaving undisturbed the ruling that heightens the burden on antitrust prosecutors when the target companies have a hybrid...more

Flaster Greenberg PC

Antitrust Blitz: NFL’s Sunday Ticket Ruling Could Have Potentially Broad Implication for All Professional Sports

Flaster Greenberg PC on

On June 27, 2024, a jury in the United States District Court for the Central District of California rendered a multibillion-dollar verdict in favor of restaurant/bar owners and individual customers and against the National...more

Morgan Lewis

Supreme Court’s Cert Denial Leaves Low Pleading Bar for Claims Against Sports Leagues

Morgan Lewis on

The US Supreme Court on April 22, 2024 denied a petition for a writ of certiorari in the closely watched antitrust case United States Soccer Federation Inc. v. Relevent Sports LLC. The decision raises important questions...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

Antitrust Judgment-Sharing Agreements Remain Viable (For Now) After Supreme Court Denies Certiorari

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a district court decision upholding the validity and enforceability of a judgment-sharing agreement (JSA) among defendants in an antitrust civil price fixing action....more

Foley & Lardner LLP

The NIL Presumption: Is the Newest NCAA Measure a Boon for Enforcement or the Next Front for Legal Challenge?

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The Name, Image, and Likeness (“NIL”) era of college sports has brought headlines, rumors, and dollar signs, but little in the way of NCAA enforcement. The NCAA’s seeming reluctance to take action against perceived violators...more

Proskauer Rose LLP

The Potential Antitrust Impact Of High Court Section 230 Case

Proskauer Rose LLP on

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act was originally thought of as "force for securing decency on the Internet," as the late Judge Robert A. Katzmann of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit explained in a...more

Fenwick & West LLP

The FTC Continues to Broaden Its Enforcement Authority to Pursue Chair Khan’s Agenda

Fenwick & West LLP on

On July 9, 2021, just days into her tenure as Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Commission) Chair, Lina Khan led the Commission’s charge to rescind the agency’s 2015 policy statement (2015 Statement) on its approach to...more

BCLP

The Application of the Antitrust Laws to Joint Ventures to Be Considered by the Supreme Court

BCLP on

Joint venture analysis remains an area of confusion in antitrust law. Courts have tended to elevate form over substance, misapply economic principles, and lose focus of the basic purposes of the antitrust laws, i.e.,...more

Winstead PC

SCOTUS Sets Argument on Case with NIL Implications

Winstead PC on

An important development in the fast-changing landscape of intercollegiate athletics’ name, image, and likeness (NIL) rules may occur, when NCAA v. Alston is heard by the United States Supreme Court in March, with the Court’s...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

U.S. Department of Justice Settles Anti-Steering Suit Against Hospital System; First Such Settlement After Amex SCOTUS Decision

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

On November 15, 2018, the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice settled a two-and-a-half year long lawsuit against Atrium Health, a North Carolina hospital system formerly known as the Carolinas HealthCare...more

BakerHostetler

Ohio v. American Express: The Supreme Court Credits American Express’s Anti-Steering Provisions

BakerHostetler on

In a 5-4 decision in Ohio v. American Express, the Supreme Court affirmed that the anti-steering provisions of American Express’s merchant agreement do not violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act....more

Stoel Rives LLP

Supreme Court Delivers a Win to American Express in Antitrust Fight over Anti-Steering Rules

Stoel Rives LLP on

The Supreme Court delivered a big win to American Express last week, finding that the anti-steering rules AmEx imposes on merchants do not violate the federal Sherman Act....more

BCLP

Supreme Court Holds American Express’s Antisteering Rules Don’t Violate Antitrust Laws

BCLP on

On June 25, 2018 the Supreme Court ruled, in a 5-4 decision, that American Express’s antisteering rules do not violate federal antitrust laws. In reaching this conclusion the Court determined that, for two-sided markets like...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court - June 25, 2018

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued two decisions today: Ohio v. American Express Co., No 16-1454: American Express (Amex), like all credit-card companies, operates a transaction network that serves two groups:...more

Epstein Becker & Green

Can a Subsidiary Conspire with Its Parent?

Epstein Becker & Green on

A violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act requires an agreement between two or more separate economic entities. In Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp., 467 U.S. 752 (1984), the Supreme Court of the United States...more

Polsinelli

U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument over How to Apply the Rule of Reason to Two-Sided Markets in American Express Case

Polsinelli on

On February 26, 2018, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in Ohio, et. al. v. American Express Company, et. al., No. 16-1454. This case involves allegations that American Express unlawfully restrained trade in...more

BCLP

Supreme Court to Review Antitrust Suit Over AmEx Merchant Rules

BCLP on

The retail industry should have great interest in a case set to be decided the Supreme Court this term, the outcome of which will affect the terms and conditions of credit card acceptance for all merchants. The Supreme...more

BCLP

Supreme Court to Take Up Rule of Reason Analysis in Two-sided Markets Antitrust Case

BCLP on

On Monday, October 17, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Second Circuit’s decision in Ohio v. American Express, suggesting that the Court may be ready to shed additional light on the “rule of reason” test...more

The Volkov Law Group

Super Moon Harkens Low Tide for Hatch-Waxman Patent Disputes

The Volkov Law Group on

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of certiorari in a case that will give pharmaceutical companies pause when considering whether to settle patent challenges under Hatch-Waxman. The Supreme Court’s...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Regulatory Capture Vitiates State Action Immunity

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

The Supreme Court has ruled that when an oversight mechanism created by a State —here a State Board — is under the control of those it was supposed to be regulating (sometimes referred to by economists as “regulatory...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Supreme Court Surprises the Antitrust World with Denial of Cert in Motorola and AU Optronics

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on

Today the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari in two cases, Motorola Mobility LLC v. AU Optronics et al. and Hsiung and AU Optronics Corp. America Inc. v. United States, declining to resolve a closely watched...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Supreme Court Asked to Clarify the Reach of U.S. Antitrust Laws to Foreign Conduct

McDermott Will & Emery on

On March 16, 2015, AU Optronics Corporation America Inc. (AU Optronics) and Motorola Mobility LLC separately asked the U.S. Supreme Court to clarify the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act (FTAIA) and the extent to which...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Supreme Court Finds that Regulatory Boards Composed of “Active Market Participants” are Subject to Antitrust Laws if Not Actively...

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on

Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC, finding that North Carolina’s state board of dental examiners was subject to antitrust scrutiny under the Sherman Act...more

Troutman Pepper

The State Action Doctrine: Active Supervision Reigns Supreme

Troutman Pepper on

On February 25, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, 2015 U.S. LEXIS 1502 (2015). In the 6–3 opinion, the Court held that an action taken by...more

25 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide