Kanne v. Visa U.S.A. Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the consumer- plaintiffs were “not competitors in the allegedly affected market, which is the business of 7 providing debit network processing services to merchants . . . [n]or . . . consumers of those services”
• holding Nebraska decision rejecting Illinois Brick indirect-purchaser rule in antitrust suit against Microsoft did not reject all standing requirements
• holding consumer plaintiffs in identical Nebraska antitrust suit were not indirect purchasers of Visa and MasterCard services
• stating that “the claimed price increases over a period of years could have resulted from myriad independent reasons unrelated to the alleged violation” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)
• affirming dismissal of identical action brought under Nebraska antitrust law, holding consumers’ injuries were too remote under AGC test
• “the standing requirements for an antitrust claim under the Consumer Protection Act should be the same as for an antitrust claim under the Junkin Act.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).