Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, 431 U.S. 720 (1977), is a United States Supreme Court case that involved issues concerning statutory standing in antitrust law.. The decision established the rule that indirect purchasers of goods or services along a supply chain cannot seek damages for antitrust violations committed by the original manufacturer or service provider, but it permitted such claims ...
Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois Foundation, 402 U.S. 313 (1971), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court holding that a final judgment in an infringement suit against a first defendant that a patent is invalid bars the patentee from relitigating the same patent against other defendants. [1]
MeadWestvaco Corp. v. Illinois Dept. of Revenue, 553 U.S. 16 (2008), is a United States Supreme Court case concerning the extent a state may tax companies that are not based in their state. [ 1 ] Background
Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc., 547 U.S. 28 (2006), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the application of U.S. antitrust law to "tying" arrangements of patented products. [1]
The Supreme Court decision in Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois, 146 U.S. 387 (1892), reaffirmed that each state in its sovereign capacity holds title to all submerged lands within its borders and holds these lands in public trust. [1] This is a foundational case for the public trust doctrine.
The Supreme Court noted that in determining whether a state tax falls within the confines of the Due Process Clause, the North Dakota Supreme Court had said that due to rulings that were made after Bellas Hess, such as Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady, the "relevant inquiry under the latter test was whether 'the state has provided some ...
Because the costs of building through parks were demonstrably low, as construction before 1966 had shown, the Court held that the 1966 enactment of the "feasible and prudent" clause "indicates that protection of parkland was to be given paramount importance." [8] The Court remanded the case to the District Court for further proceedings. [9]
Adams v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 278 (1972) was a Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the right to counsel in preliminary hearings announced by Coleman v. Alabama does not have a retroactive application. [1]