Roth v. Rhodes

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that motion for judgment on the pleadings was properly granted because plaintiff alleged an existing relationship only with speculative “future patients”
• \federal cases interpreting the Sherman Act are applicable to problems arising under the Cartwright Act.\
• “federal cases interpreting the Sherman Act are applicable to problems arising under the Cartwright Act.”
• podiatrist denied space in defendants’ medical building could have not existing relationship with speculative “future patients.”
• “Section 51.5 expands on section 51 by, inter alia, specifying forms of discrimination, including refusal to deal.”
• allegation of interference with a relationship between a health care provider and future patients is insufficient

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).