Verizon Communications Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP explained

Litigants:Verizon Communications v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP
Arguedate:October 14
Argueyear:2003
Decidedate:January 13
Decideyear:2004
Fullname:Verizon Communications, Petitioner v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP
Usvol:540
Uspage:398
Parallelcitations:124 S. Ct. 872; 157 L. Ed. 2d 823; 2004 U.S. LEXIS 657
Holding:Respondent's complaint alleging breach of an incumbent LEC's 1996 Act duty to share its network with competitors does not state a claim under ยง2 of the Sherman Act.
Majority:Scalia
Joinmajority:Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer
Concurrence:Stevens (in judgment)
Joinconcurrence:Souter, Thomas

Verizon Communications v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP, often shortened to Verizon v. Trinko, 540 U.S. 398 (2004), is a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in the field of Antitrust law. It held that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 had not modified the framework of the Sherman Act, preserving claims that satisfy established antitrust standards without creating new claims that go beyond those standards. It also refused to extend the essential facilities doctrine beyond the facts of the Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp. case.

See also