Dimidowich v. Bell & Howell
| Decision Date | 25 February 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 84-1995,84-1995 |
| Citation | 810 F.2d 1517 |
| Parties | 1988-2 Trade Cases 68,289 John M. DIMIDOWICH, dba Micro Image, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BELL & HOWELL, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Robert F. Koehler, Jr., Sacramento, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant.
McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen, John R. Reese, San Francisco, Cal., for defendant-appellee.
Before FLETCHER, BOOCHEVER and NORRIS, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
Appellant's petition for rehearing is denied.
The opinion, filed November 6, 1986, 803 F.2d 1473 is modified as set forth following.
Insert on page 1478 second column line 17 of 803 F.2d before Nonetheless: "It will thus be rare for a court to infer a vertical combination solely from a business's unilateral refusal to deal with distributors or customers who do not comply with certain conditions."
Delete on page 1478 second column second line from bottom: "necessary to show a combination between himself and B & H" and replace with "necessary to infer a vertical combination from a unilateral refusal to deal."
All petitions to file amicus briefs are denied.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
95 cases
-
In re Pajaro Dunes Rental Agency, Inc.
...v. Abraio, 874 F.2d 619, 621 (9th Cir.1989) ("State Farm"); Dimidowich v. Bell & Howell, 803 F.2d 1473, 1482 (9th Cir.1986), modified, 810 F.2d 1517 (1987). Compare State Farm with Ulvestad v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 818 F.Supp. 292 44 Most recent fraudulent transfer litigation has arisen fro......
-
Vernon v. City of Los Angeles
...1236, 1238 (9th Cir.1990) (citing Dimidowich v. Bell & Howell, 803 F.2d 1473, 1482 (9th Cir.1986), reh'g denied, op. modified, 810 F.2d 1517 (9th Cir.1987)). Moreover, federal courts are not precluded from affording relief simply because neither the state supreme court nor the state legisla......
-
Univ. of Or. v. Phillips
...how the state high court would resolve it." Dimidowich v. Bell & Howell , 803 F.2d 1473, 1482 (9th Cir. 1986), modified at 810 F.2d 1517 (9th Cir. 1987). "In assessing how a state's highest court would resolve a state law question—absent controlling state authority—federal courts look to ex......
-
Fraley v. Facebook, Inc
...957 F.2d 655, 658 (9th Cir.1992) (quoting Dimidowich v. Bell & Howell, 803 F.2d 1473, 1482 (9th Cir.1986), modified on other grounds, 810 F.2d 1517 (1987) (internal citations omitted)). The Court addresses each cause of action in turn.1. Misappropriation Under California Civil Code § 3344 C......
Get Started for Free
5 books & journal articles
-
California. Practice Text
...the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Krehl v. Baskin Robbins Ice Cream Co. , 664 F.2d 1348 (9th Cir. 1982)), modified on other grounds , 810 F.2d 1517 (9th Cir. 1987). The California Supreme Court still has not decided this issue. 203. 102 Cal. App. 3d at 633-35. 204. See, e.g. , Ryko Mfg. Co. v......
-
California
...Ninth Circuit’s decision in Norman E. Krehl v. Baskin Robbins Ice Cream Co. , 664 F.2d 1348 (9th Cir. 1982)), modified on other grounds , 810 F.2d 1517 (9th Cir. 1987). The California Supreme Court still has not decided this issue. 190. 102 Cal. App. 3d at 633. 191. See, e.g. , Ryko Mfg. Co......
-
Customer and territorial restraints
...v. Bell & Howell, 803 F.2d 1473, 1481 (9th Cir. 1986) (action under Cal. antitrust law, Cartwright Act), modified on other grounds , 810 F.2d 1517 (9th Cir. 1987); Jayco Sys. v. Savin Bus. Machs. Corp., 777 F.2d 306, 317 (5th Cir. 1985); Midwestern Waffles, Inc. v. Waffle House, 734 F.2d 70......
-
Restraints of Trade
...solely on that conduct. 75 Similarly, when the defendants would have tends to exclude the possibility of independent action.”), modified, 810 F.2d 1517 (9th Cir. 1987); Fragale & Sons Beverage Co. v. Dill, 760 F.2d 469, 474 (3d Cir. 1985) (evidence of pretext, if believed by a jury, would d......
Get Started for Free