California Courts Are Beginning To Reexamine Their Outdated Decisions Addressing Vertical Price and Other Distributional Restraints Under The Cartwright Act
Thirty-five years ago, the California Supreme Court held that vertical price fixing is per se unlawful under California’s antitrust statute. 1 Since then, however, modern economic analysis and federal antitrust jurisprudence have evolved dramatically away from the antiquated common law “restraints on alienation” approach to per se condemnation. For the past thirty years, the California…
AT&T Mobility v. AU Optronics Extends The California Cartwright Act’s Expansive Geographical Scope
As all California antitrust lawyers know, California’s principal antitrust statute is the Cartwright Act.1 The Act “generally outlaws any combinations or agreements which restrain trade or competition or which fix or control prices.”2 And, as the California Supreme Court recently made clear, “[f]rom its inception, [the Act] has always been focused on the punishment of…
INBLF in Chicago Daily Bulletin
Lawrence M. Friedman of Barnes, Richardson & Colburn and the Illinois chapter president of the International Network of Boutique Law Firms (INBLF), and Steven Spielvogel of New York-based Gallion & Spielvogel LLP and president and chairman of INBLF, welcomed members to the group’s Chicago open house on Aug. 2 Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP Part-ners…
A Project’s Need For Public Services Is Not An Environmental Impact Requiring Mitigation
A project that adds homes and commercial buildings to a community typically increases the need for various municipal services, such as fire and police protection. As the Court of Appeal recently confirmed in City of Hayward v. Board of Trustees, that need, though, is not itself an “environmental impact” of the project that the California…