Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Kellogg

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “The Ninth Circuit has held that, 26 where . . . an employee is the direct and intended object of an 27 employer’s anticompetitive conduct, that employee has standing to 28 sue for antitrust injury.”
• “The Ninth Circuit has held that, 26 where . . . an employee is the direct and intended object of an 27 employer’s anticompetitive conduct, that employee has standing to 28 sue for antitrust injury.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).