Case Resources
Search this Case
in
Google Scholar
on the Web
Google
Web Search
MSN
Web Search
Yahoo!
Web Search
in the News
Google
News Search
Google
News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google
Blog Search
Technorati
Blog Search
in other Databases
Google
Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
John M. Dimidowich, Dba Micro Image, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Bell & Howell, Defendant-appellee
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. - 810 F.2d 1517
Feb. 25, 1987
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.