Johnson v. Trott & Trott P.C.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that named plaintiffs had a common interest with proposed class of End- Payors who allegedly paid supracompetitive prices as a result of defendants’ anticompetitive conduct
• stating that the interchangeability of the drug with other drugs is “such a factually intensive determination [it] is better left for resolution by a jury”
• finding that the relevant market could be restricted to a brand drug and its generic counterpart for purposes of surviving a motion to dismiss
• holding a single branded drag and its generic to be a plausible relevant market
• finding that named plaintiffs established standing to maintain class claims against drug manufacturer for anticompetitive conduct where “identity of issues” and “alignment of incentives” were present among members of the putative class
• denying motion to dismiss in reverse payment action where plaintiffs’ theory of injury depended on generic's at-risk launch

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).