857 F.2d 55 (1988)
Plaintiffs were owners, producers, and sponsors of certain men's professional tennis events. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants conspired in violation of §§ 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C.S. §§ 1 and 2, to monopolize and restrain trade in the markets for the production of such events. Plaintiffs claimed that defendants dissuaded tournament owners and producers from associating with plaintiffs or permitting participation by plaintiffs. As a result of restrictions imposed on tournament participants by defendants, plaintiffs claimed that they were limited in their ability to freely compete with defendants' events.
The district court granted defendants' motion to dismiss on the basis that plaintiffs failed to state claims upon which relief could be granted.
- The court reversed, holding that plaintiffs' complaint adequately alleged that defendants engaged in price fixing, horizontal market division, and a threatened concerted refusal to deal with plaintiffs.
- The complaint also properly alleged that defendants engaged in monopolization.
The court reversed the district court's judgment dismissing plaintiffs' antitrust claims where plaintiffs adequately alleged price fixing, horizontal market division, threatened boycott, and monopolization in their complaint against defendants. The court vacated the dismissal of plaintiff management services' common law claims and remanded with instructions to dismiss the claims with leave to replead.
Suggested Study Aid For Sports Law