Legal Opinion
Neyens v. Roth
Supreme Court of Iowa
Decided November 24, 1982No. 67083PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LARSON, Justice.
This appeal requires us to resolve whether a city ambulance service, operated as a monopoly, is subject to the provisions of the Iowa Competition Law, Iowa Code chapter 553, and if so, whether it is an activity which falls within the “state action” exemption of section 553.6(4). The district court ruled favorably to the city on both issues. We conclude the city’s ambulance service is subject to the Iowa Competition Law and that it is not within the statutory exemption. Accordingly, we reverse.
The basic facts are not in dispute. In 1974, the defendant City of Dubuque enacted an…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- United States v. Grinnell Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Parker v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Bates v. State Bar of ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Goldfarb v. Virginia State BarSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Bates v. State Bar of ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Comes v. Microsoft Corp.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2002
- Steven A. Mueller, Bradley J. Brown, Mark A. Kruse, Kevin D. Miller, and Larry E. Phipps, on Behalf of Themselves and Those Like Situated v. Wellmark, Inc. D/B/A Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Iowa, an Iowa Corporation and Wellmark Health Plan of Iowa, Inc., an Iowa CorporationSupreme Court of Iowa · 2012
- In Re South Dakota Microsoft Antitrust LitigationSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2005
- Arthur v. Microsoft Corp.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2004
- Byre v. City of ChamberlainSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.