VALLEY DRUG CO. v. GENEVA PHARM., INC.

No. 02-12091.

344 F.3d 1294 (2003)

Valley Drug Company, Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company, Inc., et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Geneva Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Abbott Laboratories, Defendants-Appellants.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

September 15, 2003.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Jon W. Zeder, Ferrell, Schultz, Carter, Zumpano & Fertel, P.A., Miami, FL, Wayne A. Cross, Robert A. Milne, Dewey Ballantine LLP, New York City, Jeffrey I. Weinberger, Stuart N. Senator, Munger, Tolles & Olson, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellants.

Richard B. Drubel, Jr., Boies, Schiller & Flexner, LLP, Hanover, NH, Eric L. Cramer, Daniel Berger, David Sorenson, Berger & Montague, P.C., Philadelphia, P.A., Scott E. Perwin, Kenny, Nachwalter, Seymour, Arnold Critchlow & Spector, P.A., Miami, FL, Barry S. Taus, Garwin, Bronzaft, Gerstein & Fisher, L.L.P., New York City, Mitchell W. Berger, Berger, Davis & Singerman, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, FL, for Plaintiffs-Appellees.

Richard A. Samp, Washington Legal Foundation, Washington, DC, for Washington Legal Foundation, Amicus Curiae.

Barbara B. Smithers, Asst. Atty. Gen., Antitrust Enforcement Div., Orlando, FL, for State of Florida, Amicus Curiae.

S. Lawrence Kocot, Don L. Bell, II, Mary Ellen Fleck, National Ass'n of Chain Drug Stores, Alexandria, VA, for National Ass'n of Chain Drug Stores, Amicus Curiae.

Paul E. Slater, Chicago, IL, for American Antitrust Institute, Amicus Curiae.

Bruce B. Vignery, Sarah Lenz Lock, Michael Robert Schuster, AARP Litigation Foundation, Washington, DC, for AARP, Amicus Curiae.

Tracy W. Wertz, Harrisburg, PA, for Pennsylvania Atty. Gen., Amicus Curiae.

Before TJOFLAT and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges, and STAFFORD, District Judge.


ANDERSON, Circuit Judge:

This case comes to us on interlocutory appeal from the district court's order granting plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment. The issue with which we are presented is whether the district court properly determined that two agreements among the defendants were per se violations of § 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1. Because we conclude that the district court incorrectly applied the law, the order below will be...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases