Alpha Lyracom Space Communications, Inc. v. COMSAT Corp., 1424

Decision Date15 May 1997
Docket NumberNo. 1424,D,1424
Citation113 F.3d 372
Parties1997-1 Trade Cases P 71,807 ALPHA LYRACOM SPACE COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a Delaware Corporation; Reverge Anselmo and Mary Anselmo, executors of the estate of plaintiff Reynold V. Anselmo, an individual, doing business as Pan American Satellite, a sole proprietorship; and Panamsat, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COMSAT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. ocket 96-9283.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

Daniel R. Shulman, Minneapolis, MN, Joseph M. Alioto, San Francisco, CA (Terry M. Walcott, Shulman, Walcott & Shulman, Minneapolis, MN; Henry Goldberg, Goldberg, Godles, Wiener & Wright, Washington, D.C., on the brief), for plaintiffs-appellants.

Mark D. Wegener, Washington, D.C., Lisa J. Sacks, Martin F. Cunniff, Howrey & Simon, Washington, D.C.; Thomas J. Sweeney, III, Davis, Scott, Weber & Edwards, New York City; Warren Y. Zeger, Keith H. Fagan, COMSAT Corporation, Bethesda, MD (on the brief, for defendant-appellee).

Before: NEWMAN, Chief Judge, MESKILL, Circuit Judge, and CEDARBAUM, * District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal concerns the narrow question of whether, under a prior decision of this Circuit in the same case, certain activities of COMSAT Corporation undertaken in its role as the United States representative to the International Telecommunications Satellite Organization ("Intelsat") are immune from discovery and consideration as probative evidence in an antitrust suit. Plaintiffs Alpha Lyracom Space Communications, Inc., Reverge and Mary Anselmo as executors of the estate of Reynold V. Anselmo, an individual doing business as Pan American Satellite, and Panamsat, L.P. (collectively "PAS") appeal from the September 6, 1996, judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (John F. Keenan, Judge). Judge Keenan granted the motion for summary judgment of defendant COMSAT and ruled, among other things, that (1) COMSAT's activities in connection with a so-called "boycott resolution," adopted and reaffirmed at meetings of Intelsat, were immune from discovery and could not be considered as evidence to support PAS's antitrust claims under this Court's prior decision in Alpha Lyracom Space Communications, Inc. v. Communications Satellite Corp., 946 F.2d 168 (2d Cir.1991), and (2) the remaining evidence offered by PAS was insufficient to support a reasonable finding that COMSAT had engaged in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Antitrust Discovery Handbook
    • 1 Enero 2013
    ...Sec. Litig., In re , 380 F. Supp. 790 (J.P.M.L. 1974), 169 212 Antitrust Discovery Handbook Alpha Lyracom Space Commc’ns v. COMSAT Corp., 113 F.3d 372 (2d Cir. 1997), 21 American Angus Ass’n v. Sysco Corp., 158 F.R.D. 372 (W.D.N.C. 1994), 60 American Chiropractic Ass’n v. Trigon Healthcare,......
  • Obtaining Documents And Written Discovery
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Antitrust Discovery Handbook
    • 1 Enero 2013
    ...not preclude production of same information in a computerized or electronic form). 53. See Alpha Lyracom Space Commc’ns v. COMSAT Corp., 113 F.3d 372 (2d Cir. 1997) (finding corporation’s activities immune from discovery). 54. See, e.g. , Kaiser v. Stewart, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1377 (E.D. ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT