1. Does the LGAA entitle local government officials to immunity from antitrust damages when they act unlawfully?

2. Does a Court of Appeals impermissibly depart from long-established legal teachings of this Court when it:

a. Fails to believe a summary judgment nonmovant's evidence on disputed issues of material fact and fails to presume the non-movant's version of such disputed factual issues is correct?

b. Fails to place on the parties asserting antitrust immunity the burden of establishing their entitlement to it but, rather, imposes on their opponent the burden of disproving such entitlement?

c. Finds Noerr-Pennington antitrust immunity to exist based simply on an assumption which conflicts with the facts that the parties asserting the defense presented no evidence of engaging in government petitioning activity and expressly denied ever having done so?

Does the LGAA entitle local government officials to immunity from antitrust damages when they act unlawfully?