This Article focuses on the application of the state action antitrust inimunity doctrine of Parker v. Brown to the regulatory programs of state administrative agencies having statewide jurisdiction. It concludes that state agencies should be subject to significantly different requirements for antitrust immunity than are local governmental units. This Article also addresses unresolved issues that frequently recur in the context of state administrative action, such as the effect of retroactive intetpretations of state policy by a state agency, whether the clear articulation and active supervision requirements for antitrust immunity play any separate role in the context of administrative policy making, and whether any distinctions should be dr...
In North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners, the Court refused to exempt the board from the se...
I. Introduction II. The Development and Restriction of State Action Immunity for Cities: The Parker ...
The Supreme Court has now agreed to review the Eleventh Circuit\u27s decision in Phoebe-Putney, whic...
This Article focuses on the application of the state action antitrust inimunity doctrine of Parker v...
The Parker v. Brown (or “state action”) doctrine and the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution impo...
The Parker v. Brown (or “state action”) doctrine and the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution impo...
In 1943 the United States Supreme Court created a judicial exemption to the federal antitrust laws i...
The state-action immunity doctrine of Parker v. Brown immunizes anticompetitive state regulations fr...
Numerous exemptions from the antitrust laws have been recognized to facilitate certain activities wh...
The collateral order doctrine is perhaps the most significant exception to the general rule that onl...
Can a state agency be so dominated by the profession it regulates that the agency is not considered ...
This Recent Development first considers the evolution of the Parker doctrine in a variety of context...
This Article analyzes the state action exemption by examining the case law to which it has given ris...
In the post-Seminole Tribe world, the legal analysis in situations where states have chosen regulati...
Currently the Antitrust Modernization Commission is considering numerous proposals for adjusting the...
In North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners, the Court refused to exempt the board from the se...
I. Introduction II. The Development and Restriction of State Action Immunity for Cities: The Parker ...
The Supreme Court has now agreed to review the Eleventh Circuit\u27s decision in Phoebe-Putney, whic...
This Article focuses on the application of the state action antitrust inimunity doctrine of Parker v...
The Parker v. Brown (or “state action”) doctrine and the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution impo...
The Parker v. Brown (or “state action”) doctrine and the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution impo...
In 1943 the United States Supreme Court created a judicial exemption to the federal antitrust laws i...
The state-action immunity doctrine of Parker v. Brown immunizes anticompetitive state regulations fr...
Numerous exemptions from the antitrust laws have been recognized to facilitate certain activities wh...
The collateral order doctrine is perhaps the most significant exception to the general rule that onl...
Can a state agency be so dominated by the profession it regulates that the agency is not considered ...
This Recent Development first considers the evolution of the Parker doctrine in a variety of context...
This Article analyzes the state action exemption by examining the case law to which it has given ris...
In the post-Seminole Tribe world, the legal analysis in situations where states have chosen regulati...
Currently the Antitrust Modernization Commission is considering numerous proposals for adjusting the...
In North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners, the Court refused to exempt the board from the se...
I. Introduction II. The Development and Restriction of State Action Immunity for Cities: The Parker ...
The Supreme Court has now agreed to review the Eleventh Circuit\u27s decision in Phoebe-Putney, whic...