California Retail Liquor Dealers Assn. v. Midcal Aluminum, Inc.¶
(1980). California Retail Liquor Dealers Assn. v. Midcal Aluminum, Inc.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Domain-specific¶
- Parker immunity doctrine
- These are actor-specific paths within U.S. federal antitrust state-action doctrine, not a blanket exemption for anything labeled governmental.
This sourceThe holding concerns the state-action test for its private wine-pricing system; no present-day per-se rule about all resale pricing is inferred.
- These are actor-specific paths within U.S. federal antitrust state-action doctrine, not a blanket exemption for anything labeled governmental.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. The single citation of this work carries no recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:10279c7dc83f · see in the full table