Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.

E666876

United States Supreme Court case antitrust case

Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. is a U.S. Supreme Court case that defined when litigation can be considered a "sham" unprotected by the First Amendment under antitrust law.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Statements Referenced by

Statements (40)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	United States Supreme Court case ⓘ antitrust case ⓘ
areaOfLaw	First Amendment law ⓘ antitrust law ⓘ civil procedure ⓘ
arguedDate	1992-10-06 ⓘ
citation	508 U.S. 49 ⓘ
citationStyle	Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc., 508 U.S. 49 (1993) NERFINISHED ⓘ
constitutionalProvision	First Amendment to the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ
country	United States of America ⓘ surface form: United States
court	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate	1993-04-20 ⓘ
decisionType	unanimous decision ⓘ
docketNumber	91-1043 ⓘ
holding	Objectively reasonable litigation cannot be deemed a sham and is immune from antitrust liability under the Noerr-Pennington doctrine. ⓘ To be a sham, litigation must be objectively baseless and subjectively intended to interfere directly with a competitor’s business relationships through the use of governmental process. ⓘ
impact	clarified scope of sham litigation exception to Noerr-Pennington immunity ⓘ limited antitrust liability for parties bringing objectively reasonable lawsuits ⓘ
jurisdiction	federal question jurisdiction ⓘ
keyPhrase	Noerr-Pennington doctrine NERFINISHED ⓘ objectively baseless litigation ⓘ sham exception ⓘ
legalIssue	Noerr-Pennington doctrine NERFINISHED ⓘ antitrust immunity for petitioning activity ⓘ sham litigation exception ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy	Justice Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED ⓘ
page	49 ⓘ
petitioner	Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. NERFINISHED ⓘ
proceduralPosture	review of Ninth Circuit decision ⓘ
relatedArea	competition between video rental business and motion picture copyright holders ⓘ
relatedDoctrine	Noerr-Pennington immunity NERFINISHED ⓘ
reporter	United States Reports ⓘ
respondent	Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. NERFINISHED ⓘ
shamTestElement	objective baselessness of the lawsuit ⓘ subjective intent to use the process to interfere with a competitor ⓘ
shortName	PREI v. Columbia Pictures NERFINISHED ⓘ
subjectMatter	copyright infringement litigation used as basis for antitrust counterclaim ⓘ
testEstablished	two-part sham litigation test ⓘ
volume	508 ⓘ
yearDecided	1993 ⓘ

Referenced by (2)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

BE&K Construction Co. v. NLRB → relatedCase → Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. ⓘ

Noerr-Pennington doctrine → clarifiedInCase → Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. ⓘ