Skip to main content
· 9/12/1990

Allied-Signal, Inc. v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp.

Citations

  • 132 F.R.D. 134
  • 18 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 246
  • 17 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1638
  • 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12182
  • 1990 WL 133198

How courts have described this case

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

  • in a case decided prior to Copper-weld, finding that transactions between parents and subsidiaries are not immune to Robinson-Patman Act claims
  • lobbyist’s intentional failure to make disclosure in violation of statutory duty is contrary to public policy, fails to measure up to right dealing and thus constitutes fraudulent scheme
  • egregious misuse of legal proceedings must rise to level of a constitutional violation
  • “In the absence of a horizontal conspiracy to charge different prices or a vertical agreement to exclude competitors, price discrimination does not support a claim under Section 1 of the Sherman Act”
  • discussing the elements required to prove a Section 1985 claim
  • vagueness standard for non-criminal statutes

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cabranes

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.