Legal Opinion

Lorix v. Crompton Corp.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided August 22, 2006No. A05-2148PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ROSS, Judge.

This is a case about alleged price-fixing under the Minnesota Antitrust Act in the sale of chemicals used in the tire-manufacturing process. In this appeal from judgment on the pleadings for lack of standing, appellant tire-consumer Diane Lorix argues that the district court erred by applying an incorrect standing standard and by determining that her claimed injuries are too remote to confer standing. We conclude that Lorix lacks standing because she does not allege that she is a participant in the market restrained by the alleged antitrust violations. We therefore affirm.

FA…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Sierra Club v. MortonSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of CarpentersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. Blue Shield of Va. v. McCreadySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. Martens v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2000

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In Re Intel Corp. Microprocessor Antitrust Lit.District Court, D. Delaware · 2007
  2. Lorix v. Crompton Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
  3. In Re Lorazepam & Clorazepate Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2008

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API