In Command Tech., Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp. et al., a Montgomery County, Maryland jury found Lockheed Martin Corp. liable to Command Technology Inc. for illegally interfering with Command Technology’s efforts to sell competing technical maintenance software for F-16 jet fighters resold to American allies. According to Command Technology’s complaint, Lockheed allegedly sought to lock […]
Category Archives: US State Courts
PI May Be Appropriate Under State Law Even if All Factors of Test Not Met
October 31, 2013 – 3:52 pm
In Heil Trailer International Company v. Gavin Kula et al., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit preliminarily enjoined the defendant from using the plaintiff’s trade secrets. Heil Trailer alledged that former employees – while still working for Heil – illegally sent confidential information to a competitor. The trial court denied Heil’s request […]
Proposed Class Action Accuses Popular Restaurants of Illegally Fixing Tip Rates
July 31, 2013 – 11:19 am
In Diamond et al. v. Darden Restaurants, Inc. et al., plaintiff Ted Diamond filed a proposed class action suit against the owners of several popular restaurant chains, such as Red Lobster, Olive Garden, Applebee’s, and Ruby Tuesday, accusing the restaurants of fixing prices at locations in New York City’s Times Square for automatic gratuities and […]
Minor League Baseball Does Not Share MLB’s Antitrust Exemption
April 24, 2013 – 4:10 pm
In Jim Evans Academy of Professional Umpiring Inc. v. The National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues Inc. et al., a Florida state court refused to rely on the baseball antitrust exemption to dismiss the plaintiff umpiring school’s complaint alleging that Minor League Baseball violated the state’s antitrust laws by revoking the school’s accreditation to train […]
Supreme Court Blocks Tactic Intended to Keep Class Actions in State Court
April 22, 2013 – 10:18 am
In The Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Greg Knowles, the United States Supreme Court held unanimously that named plaintiffs in a purported class action cannot bar federal jurisdiction by seeking less than $5 million in damages. Under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), an action seeking more than $5 million in damages triggers federal court […]
Patent Holder Seeks to Litigate Licensing Terms in State Court Under Recent Supreme Court Case
April 16, 2013 – 1:58 pm
In Gunn v. Minton, the United States Supreme Court held that patent-related legal malpractice suits should be heard in state court. Motorola has argued to the Federal Circuit that under the Court’s Gunn rationale that appellate court lacks jurisdiction over Apple’s appeal in a suit alleging that Motorola failed to license its patents on fair, […]
Court Rejects Double Recovery Claim In LCD Antitrust MDL
February 7, 2013 – 7:09 pm
In Rockwell Automation Inc v. AU Optronics Corporation et al., Northern District of California Judge Susan Illston rejected LG Display Co. Ltd.’s argument that Rockwell Automation Inc.’s state price-fixing claims would lead to duplicative recovery in the multidistrict litigation over liquid crystal display panels. LG brought counterclaims and affirmative defenses against Rockwell’s Wisconsin state law […]
California Supreme Court Refused to Hear Pharmacies’ Price-Fixing Case
January 28, 2013 – 5:06 pm
In Clayworth v. Pfizer, the California Supreme Court denied a petition to rehear a consolidated antitrust suit, filed by a group of pharmacies, accusing Pfizer Inc., GlaxoSmithKline PLC and other drug makers of conspiring to inflate drug prices in the U.S. and keeping lower-priced Canadian drugs off the market. The defendants originally won at the […]
Marketer’s Antitrust Suit Against DirecTV Does Not Violate Free Speech
October 16, 2012 – 1:19 pm
In Basic Your Best Buy Inc. v. DirecTV Inc., a California Court of Appeal refused to dismiss a $83.7 million lawsuit against DirecTV Inc. The plaintiff, a marketer of DirecTV products, accused DirecTV of conspiring to restrain trade by suddenly ending its contract, threatening litigation, warning other DirecTV dealers not to buy the company’s assets, […]
State Argued For Broad Prohibition of Resale Price Maintenance Under State Law
May 1, 2012 – 4:48 pm
In People of the State of New York v. Tempur-Pedic International Inc., New York State is appealing a decision dismissing a case challenging Tempur-Pedic’s policy of informing retailers that it stop selling to them, with limited exceptions, if they undercut the mattrace manufacturer’s suggested retail price. Although federal antitrust law permits such a policy, the […]