· 10/20/2006
Coca-Cola Co. v. Harmar Bottling Co.
Citations
- 218 S.W.3d 671
- 50 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 21
- 2006 Tex. LEXIS 1038
- 2006 WL 2997436
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that to prevail in a Texas antitrust suit, “there must be evidence of demonstrable economic effect, not just an inference of possible effect” (internal quotation and citation omitted) (emphasis in original)
- stating that Lifestyles’s market share fell between 2004-2006 and 2008-2010, but offering no facts or analysis as to why
- indicating that tortious interference with a contract and tortious interference with a business relationship are separate torts
- signaling that tortious interference with a contract and tortious interference with a business relationship are separate torts
- signaling that tortious interference with a contract and tortious interference with a business relationship are separate torts
- signaling that tortious interference with a contract and tortious interference with a business relationship are separate torts
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Brister, Green, Hecht, Jefferson, Johnson, O'Neill, Wainwright, Willett
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.