Dawkins v. Nabisco, Inc.

How later courts describe this case

• Inducing favorable governmental action, even for anticompeti-tive purposes, is not a violation of the antitrust law
• "Only by inference can the existence of intent — or the differentiation between its forms, such as general or specific — be determined"
• Where identity of confidential informant was not necessary to assure a fair opportunity to defendants to prepare their defense, identity could be -withheld
• “a person who was not named in the wiretap order and was not a party to any conversation intercepted during that tap is not an ‘aggrieved person’ and may not move to suppress information derived from it”
• “a person who was not named in the wiretap order and was not a party to a conversation intercepted during that tap is not an ‘aggrieved person’ and may not move to suppress information derived from it.”
• one lawsuit does not constitute a pattern