Eighth Circuit· 8/26/1992
Amerinet, Inc. v. Xerox Corp.
Citations
- 972 F.2d 1483
- 1992 WL 205510
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that the plaintiff's damage expert admitted that the plaintiff was in a period of decline prior to the defendant's alleged antitrust violations
- noting that the plaintiffs damage expert admitted that the plaintiff was in a period of decline prior to the defendant’s alleged antitrust violations
- affirming summary judgment where evidence showed customers “could realistically have purchased” the tying product separately
- refusing to find an illegal tie in part because the plaintiff did not demonstrate that defendant used its market power in the tying product market “to shelter an inferior or overpriced product from competition”
- once causation of damages established amount of damages may be determined by just and reasonable estimate
- \wrongful means\ is \conduct which is itself capable of forming the basis for liability of the actor\
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Beam, Kaufman, Loken
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
101 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Amoco Oil Co. v. ErvinSupreme Court of Colorado· 1996-01-16· cited 844×
- Harris Group, Inc. v. RobinsonColorado Court of Appeals· 2009-03-05· cited 520×
- Data General Corp. v. Grumman Systems Support Corp.First Circuit· 1994-09-15· cited 321×
- Blades v. Monsanto Co.Eighth Circuit· 2005-03-07· cited 203×
- Concord Boat Corp. v. Brunswick Corp.Eighth Circuit· 2000-03-24· cited 202×
- Unnamed caseEighth Circuit· 1996-08-21· cited 154×
- Ralph L. Gray, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. O. Gene Bicknell, Appellee/cross-AppellantEighth Circuit· 1996-06-25· cited 139×
- Unnamed caseEighth Circuit· 1994-11-22· cited 133×
- Brian Keenan, an Individual Resident of the State of Minnesota v. Computer Associates International, Inc., a Foreign CorporationEighth Circuit· 1994-01-21· cited 132×
- Cascade Health Solutions v. PeaceHealthNinth Circuit· 2008-01-31· cited 129×
- Virginia Panel Corporation, Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Mac Panel CompanyFederal Circuit· 1998-02-20· cited 126×
- Rossi v. Standard Roofing, Inc.Third Circuit· 1998-09-09· cited 116×
- Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Biovail Corp. InternationalD.C. Circuit· 2001-07-31· cited 96×
- DOUBLE D SPOTTING SERVICE, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SUPERVALU, INC.; World Super Services, Inc., Defendants-AppelleesEighth Circuit· 1998-02-11· cited 82×
- Nitro Distributing, Inc. v. Alticor, Inc.Eighth Circuit· 2009-05-04· cited 80×
- Southeast Missouri Hospital v. C.R. Bard, Inc.Eighth Circuit· 2011-06-08· cited 72×
- HipSaver, Inc. v. KielMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2013-03-13· cited 67×
- Behrend v. Comcast Corp.Third Circuit· 2011-08-23· cited 54×
- David Marts, Doing Business as Lasertech v. Xerox, Inc.Eighth Circuit· 1996-03-11· cited 54×
- Varner v. Peterson FarmsEighth Circuit· 2004-06-16· cited 52×
Cites
62 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court· 1986-06-25· cited 119,442×
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court· 1986-03-26· cited 58,760×
- United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court· 1962-05-14· cited 7,008×
- United States v. Grinnell Corp.Supreme Court· 1966-06-13· cited 2,474×
- Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc.Supreme Court· 1977-01-25· cited 2,155×
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.Supreme Court· 1969-05-19· cited 2,097×
- Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc.Supreme Court· 1992-06-08· cited 1,717×
- Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1958-03-10· cited 1,658×
- Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper Co.Supreme Court· 1931-02-24· cited 1,290×
- Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc.Supreme Court· 1946-03-25· cited 1,158×
- Jefferson Parish Hospital District No. 2 v. HydeSupreme Court· 1984-03-27· cited 891×
- Eastman Kodak Co. v. Southern Photo Materials Co.Supreme Court· 1927-02-21· cited 824×
- MCI Communications Corporation and MCI Telecommunications Corporation v. American Telephone and Telegraph CompanySeventh Circuit· 1983-10-01· cited 490×
- J. Truett Payne Co. v. Chrysler Motors Corp.Supreme Court· 1981-05-18· cited 341×
- Unnamed caseEighth Circuit· 1988-04-01· cited 340×
- Veteto v. WardenSupreme Court· 1983-10-11· cited 230×
- James T. Voutour v. Harold Vitale, James T. Voutour v. Harold VitaleFirst Circuit· 1985-05-09· cited 210×
- Coleman Motor Co., a Pennsylvania Corporation v. Chrysler Corporation and Chrysler Motors CorporationThird Circuit· 1975-11-14· cited 163×
- Advance Business Systems and Supply Company v. Scm Corporation, Advance Business Systems and Supply Company v. Scm CorporationFourth Circuit· 1969-08-18· cited 145×
- Gillies v. DelozierSupreme Court· 1986-01-27· cited 138×
Other cases named Amerinet, Inc. v. Xerox Corp.
2 other CourtListener records share this case name.
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.