Legal Opinion
Bunker's Glass Co. v. Pilkington PlC
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided June 28, 2002No. 1 CA-CV 01-0046PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WEISBERG, Judge.
¶ 1 In this appeal, we consider whether an indirect purchaser of goods may bring an action to recover damages resulting from the alleged price-fixing by the manufacturers of those goods. For the reasons that follow, we hold that such an action is allowed under Arizona law.
BACKGROUND
¶ 2 Flat glass production is a multibillion dollar industry in the United States. In re Flat Glass Antitrust Litig., 191 F.R.D. 472, 475 (W.D.Pa.1999). The appellees are the principal manufacturers of all flat glass products sold in the United States, including Arizona.
¶3 “Flat glass” refers…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Illinois Brick Co. v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968
- California v. ARC America Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Pool v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1984
- Daou v. HarrisArizona Supreme Court · 1984
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Elkins v. Microsoft Corp.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2002
- Comes v. Microsoft Corp.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2002
- Windesheim v. LaroccaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2015
- In re Packaged Seafood Products Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2017
- Bunker's Glass Co. v. PILKINGTON, PLCArizona Supreme Court · 2003
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.