No. 20-520
American Athletic Conference, et al. v. Shawne Alston, et al.
Amici (1)
Experienced Counsel
Key Terms:
Antitrust JusticiabilityDoctri
Antitrust JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2020-12-11
Related Cases:
20-512
(Vide)
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the Sherman Act authorizes a court to subject the product-defining rules of a joint venture to full Rule of Reason review, and to hold those rules unlawful if, in the court's view, they are not the least restrictive means that could have been used to accomplish their procompetitive goal.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Sherman Act authorizes a court to subject the product-defining rules of a joint venture to full Rule of Reason review, and to hold those rules unlawful if, in the court's view, they are not the least restrictive means that could have been used to accomplish their procompetitive goal
Docket Entries
2021-07-23
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
2021-02-22
CIRCULATED.
2021-02-04
Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.
2021-02-04
Record from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer. Part of the record is SEALED and has been electronically filed.
2020-11-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/11/2020.
2020-11-24
Reply of petitioner The Big Ten Conference, Inc. filed. (Distributed)
2020-11-18
Brief amici curiae of Antitrust Law And Business School Professors filed.
2020-10-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 19, 2020)
Attorneys
American Athletic Conference, et al.
Antitrust Economists
Bruce Davidson Oakley — Hogan Lovells US LLP, Amicus
Antitrust Law And Business School Professors
Jack Edward Pace III — White & Case LLP, Amicus
Open Markets Institute
Jay L. Himes — Labaton Sucharow, LLP, Amicus
Sam C. Ehrlich
Anita M. Moorman — Amicus
Shawne Alston, et al.
Steve W. Berman — Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, Respondent
The Big Ten Conference, Inc.
Andrew John Pincus — Mayer Brown LLP, Petitioner
The Committee to Support the Antitrust Laws