holding AT T violated section 2 of Sherman Act by refusing to connect MCI to its network, an essential facility
Summary of this case from Stein v. Pacific BellNo. 83-21, 83-217.
October 11, 1983.
C.A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 708 F. 2d 1081.
holding AT T violated section 2 of Sherman Act by refusing to connect MCI to its network, an essential facility
Summary of this case from Stein v. Pacific Bellvacating damages award because damages model did not distinguish between damages based on unlawful versus lawful conduct
Summary of this case from Medcom Holding Co. v. Baxter Travenol Labvacating damages award because damages model did not distinguish between damages based on unlawful versus lawful conduct
Summary of this case from Medcom Holding v. Baxter Travenol Labrejecting defendants' suggestion that a 26-day time limit in an antitrust case was too short and that the limit should have been computed in months, not days
Summary of this case from Planned Parenthood of Cent. New Jersey v. Vernierorejecting a profit maximization test for predatory pricing
Summary of this case from Jays Foods, Inc. v. Frito-Lay, Inc.setting forth standards of essential facility doctrine
Summary of this case from Central States Enterprises, Inc. v. I.C.CFull title:AMERICAN TELEPHONE TELEGRAPH CO. v. MCI COMMUNICATIONS CORP. ET AL. MCI…
Court:U.S.
Date published: Oct 11, 1983
In the Seventh Circuit, the plaintiffs need not show a pattern of baseless repetitive claims in order to…
U.S. v. LangSee United States v. Gonzalez, 559 F.2d 1271, 1274 (5th Cir. 1977);United States v. Thevis, 665 F.2d 616, 629…