International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation v. General Telephone & Electronics Corporation and Hawaiian Telephone Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding district court clearly erred in finding a valid submarket based on only two Brown Shoe indicia: industry recognition (including statements by the defendant itself) and distinct customers
• Clayton Act proviso barring private injunction suit against common carriers regulated by ICC did not bar private injunction suit against telephone company regulated by FCC
• reference to legislative history is appropriate when the statutory language is ambiguous or where a literal interpretation would thwart the overall statutory scheme
• impact of regulations must be assessed as fact of market life
• impact of regulations must be assessed as fact of market life
• “[T]he fact of regulation is significant, but not because it embodies a doctrinal scheme different from the antitrust law; the sole legal perspective is that afforded by the antitrust law.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).