3430. Noerr-Pennington Doctrine | Pdf Doc Docx | Jury Instructions

 California Jury Instructions   34 Cartwright Act 
3430. Noerr-Pennington Doctrine | Pdf Doc Docx | Jury Instructions

Last updated: 10/12/2020

3430. Noerr-Pennington Doctrine

Start Your Free Trial $ 13.99
200 Ratings
What you get:
  • Instant access to fillable Microsoft Word or PDF forms.
  • Minimize the risk of using outdated forms and eliminate rejected fillings.
  • Largest forms database in the USA with more than 80,000 federal, state and agency forms.
  • Download, edit, auto-fill multiple forms at once in MS Word using our Forms Workflow Ribbon
  • Trusted by 1,000s of Attorneys and Legal Professionals


3430. "Noerr-Pennington" Doctrine Instruction No 1 Request by Plaintiff Given as Proposed Refused Withdrawn Request by Defendant Given as Modified Requested by Given on Court's Motion Judge Instruction No 1 [Name of defendant] claims that [his/her/its] agreement with [name of alleged coparticipant] did not violate the law because [he/she/it] was trying in good faith to influence government action. [Name of plaintiff] claims that this action was a sham or a pretext to restrain competition. To establish [his/her/its] claim, [name of plaintiff] must prove both of the following: 1. 2. That [name of defendant]'s actions before [name of governmental body] were undertaken without regard to the merits; and That the reason [name of defendant] engaged in [specify the petitioning activity, e.g., "filing an objection to an environmental impact report"] was to use the [specify the claimed process, e.g., "environmental agency approval"] process to harm [name of plaintiff] by [specify the manner of harm, e.g., "delaying [name of plaintiff]'s entry into the market"], rather than to obtain a successful outcome from that process. ________________________________________________________________________________ New September 2003

Related forms

Our Products