Diaz v. Farley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The application of the per se rule is reserved for situations where the conduct almost always has an anticompeti-tive effect and virtually never has a pro-competitive effect. If conduct falls into a per se category, the conduct is presumed illegal. For example, price-fixing, horizontal divisions of markets, bid rigging, tying arrangements, and horizontal refusals to deal have earned the per se label because experience has shown that these arrangements are al most always anticompetitive and rarely have any procompetitive justification. The per se analysis applies because the conduct is so certain to unreasonably displace the competitive process that it is presumed illegal.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 427 F. Supp. 2d 1032 - Sunlight Saunas, Inc. v. Sundance Sauna, Inc.

2. “and had not been historically shown to always or almost always adversely affect competition). 49 Therefore, we find that plaintiffs have not shown that the conduct at issue in this case constitutes the type of horizontal group boycott deserving of per se analysis. They have failed to”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Anthony Diaz v. Michael Farley

3. “The agreement enables the patient or ob/gyn doctor performing a procedure to choose which anesthesiologist he or she will use rather than requiring the doctor to use whichever anesthesiologist happens to be on call,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Anthony Diaz v. Michael Farley