Richard Goldwasser, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Ameritech Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the plaintiff could not pursue a damages claim because it “necessarily implicate[d] the rates [the utility] [wa]s charg- ing,” which was barred by the filed rate doctrine
• explaining the decision “to forgo cash revenues and efficient methods of doing busi- ness for the sole purpose of driving its rival out of the market” is a § 2 violation
• applying the Filed Rate Doctrine even where reviewing agencies “rarely exercise their muscle and thus give no meaningful review to the rate structure”
• describing the requirements of a Sherman Act Section 2 claim at the pleading stage
• explaining the decision “to forgo cash revenues and efficient methods of doing busi- ness for the sole purpose of driving its rival out of the market” is a § 2 violation
• explaining the decision “to forgo cash revenues and efficient methods of doing busi- ness for the sole purpose of driving its rival out of the market” is a § 2 violation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).