Hanover 3201 Realty, LLC v. Village Supermarkets, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
1DissentGreenberg, Circuit Judge
I concur with and join in Sections I, the background section, and II.A.', the antitrust standing section, of Judge Fuentes’s opinion. Thus, I agree with his conclusion in Section II.A. that plaintiff, Hanover 3201 Realty, LLC (“3201 Realty”), has antitrust standing in the full-service supermarket market but not in the full-service supermarket rental space market. I cannot agree, however, with Judge Fuentes’s opinion to the extent that I believe it expands the sham exception to Noerr-Pen-nington immunity. I decline to join in this aspect of Judge Fuentes’s opinion because: (1) 3201 Realty has…
2Cases cited50 opinions
- Arizona v. FulminanteSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Seminole Tribe of Florida v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Mark D. Tourscher v. Martin Horn, Secretary of the Pa. Dept. Of Corrections John McCullough Superintendent ,(d.c. Civil No. 98-Cv-00176j)Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
- Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.