American Professional Testing Service, Inc. v. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Legal & Professional Publications, Inc.

Good Law
108 F.3d 1147·1997 WL 106682
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 11, 1997Nos. 95-56513, 95-56523California3,379 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Scannlain, J.

We must decide whether the sponsor of BAR/BRI, the nation’s dominant bar review course, violated the Sherman Act by distributing disparaging fliers about, and hiring a faculty member away from, the sponsor of Barpassers, one of its competitors.

I

Bar review companies offer courses to recent law school graduates who are preparing to sit for a state bar examination. The bar examination of most states includes a “multi-state” portion consisting of a standardized 200 question multiple-choice test (identical in all states), and a state-law component that tests the law of the particular state offering the examination. A full service bar review course prepares a student for both portions of a state’s bar examination: multistate and state law. A supplemental bar review course prepares a student for only one portion of a state’s bar examination.

Bar review course sponsors compete for potential customers on law school campuses through distribution of advertising fliers, sponsored student events, and advertisements in student newspapers. These businesses promote their courses directly to law students throughout their three years of law school. Some law students are employed as…

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.