Legal Opinion
Brazil v. Arkansas Board of Dental Examiners
District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Decided April 6, 1984No. LR-C-81-675PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
EISELE, Chief Judge.
In this action plaintiffs seek injunctive relief and damages for alleged violations of section 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1, 2 (1976), as well as alleged violations of their rights under the first, fifth, ninth and fourteenth amendments to the United States Constitution. At issue before the Court are the defendants’ motions to dismiss the antitrust claims. For the reasons set forth below, the motions will be granted in part and denied in part.
I. Facts
A. Parties to the Litigation
Six plaintiffs have joined in filing a complaint…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- United Mine Workers v. PenningtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Parker v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking UnlimitedSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Bates v. State Bar of ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- PARAGOULD CABLEVISION v. City of Paragould, Ark.District Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1990
- Brazil v. Arkansas State Board of Dental ExaminersCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1985
- (1996), Maryland Attorney General Reports1996
- Brazil v. Arkansas Board of Dental ExaminersDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1984
- Brazil v. Arkansas State Board Of Dental ExaminersCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1985