• The Law of Anticompetitive Price Squeeze Claims, Duties to Deal with Competitors and Predatory Pricing after Linkline, Brooke Group and Trinko
  • November 7, 2012 | Author: M. Brian McMahon
  • Law Firm: The Law Offices of M. Brian McMahon - Los Angeles Office
  • Traditional antitrust theories of liability include price squeeze, predatory pricing and refusals to aid competitors. But three United States Supreme Court decisions, Pacific Bell Telephone Co. v. Linkline Communications, Inc., 555 U.S. 2009), Verizon Communications, Inc. v Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, 540 U.S. 398 (2004) and Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 509 U.S. 209 (1993) have raised serious doubts whether the three antitrust theories of liability are still viable. This article analyzes the future of these three theories of antitrust liability in light of these decisions. The article also focuses on lower courts’ inconsistent application of Brooke Group to bundled discounts and the extension of the Linkline rationale to monopoly leveraging claims.