Robert J. Hirsh v. Martindale-Hubbell, Inc.

Good Law
674 F.2d 1343·1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 19858
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 23, 198281-5070California4,036 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ely, J.

Robert J. Hirsh, a practicing attorney, brought this antitrust action challenging certain sales practices of Martindale-Hub-bell [hereinafter “Martindale”] as violative of § 1 of the Sherman Act ( 15 U.S.C. § 1 ) and § 3 of the Clayton Act ( 15 U.S.C. § 14 ). Upon the submission of cross mo tions for summary judgment, the District Court, 505 P.Supp. 114, concluded that no violation of those provisions of the antitrust laws had been established and entered summary judgment in favor of Martindale. We affirm.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Martindale publishes the Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory [hereinafter “the Directory”], the nation’s leading annual directory of attorneys and the only directory of its kind expressly approved by the American Bar Association. The Directory, a multi-volume set, contains listings of virtually every American and Canadian lawyer as well as listings of a limited number of foreign attorneys. Martindale distributes the Directory, both nationally and internationally, to attorneys, law firms, public agencies, private concerns, libraries, and schools.

In addition to its ABA approval, certain other attributes of the Directory render it a particularly attractive…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.