California v. ARC America Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that Illinois Brick “noted two possible exceptions” to the indirect-purchaser rule, one of which is the ownership-control exception
• holding that state indirect purchaser actions were not preempted by section 4 of the Clayton Act
• holding that Illinois Brick did not preempt state laws that permit suits by plaintiffs with passed-on injuries
• holding that the Sherman Act, which does not allow indirect purchaser actions, does not preempt state laws that allow indirect purchasers to obtain relief
• holding that federal antitrust laws permit only direct purchaser recovery and for that reason, do not preempt state laws permitting indirect purchaser recovery
• holding that states may expressly grant indirect purchasers the right to recover under state law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).