Dong v. Howe

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that House and Senate reports indicated “strong opposition in both houses” to proposed provision
• observing that “[t]he vagaries of the marketplace usually deny us sure knowledge of what plaintiffs situation would have been in the absence of the defendant’s antitrust violation”
• evaluating the competitive injury requirement of RobinsonPatman Act § 2(a) in light of analogous interpretations of Clayton Act § 7
• referring to expert economic testimony not based on \documentary evidence as to the effect of the discrimination on retail prices\ as \weak\ at best
• evaluating the competitive injury requirement of RobinsonPatman Act §2(a) in light of analogous interpretations of Clayton Act § 7
• referring to expert economic testimony not based on “documentary evidence as to the effect of the discrimination on retail prices” as “weak” at best

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).