Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

'Price effect' not essential to Sherman Act violation: even the single 'small merchant' has antitrust rights

Article Abstract:

Review of the US Supreme Court's decision in Klor's, Inc. v. Broadway-Hale Stores (1959) indicates that the requirements that antitrust plaintiffs demonstrate the price effects of market power and some public harm are recent judicial constructs. Klor's was decided based on the Sherman Act, and the Court was unwilling to require showing of public harm. The Court accepted the presumption of Congress that group boycotts are inherently anticompetitive. The Court also affirmed the rights of small firms to be free of anticompetitive practices regardless of consumer welfare.

Author: Mueller, Charles E., Black, Hugo
Publisher: Antitrust Law & Economics Review, Inc.
Publication Name: Antitrust Law and Economics Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0003-6048
Year: 1992
Laws, regulations and rules, Home appliances industry, Appliance industry, Restraint of trade, Boycotts

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Elements of an antitrust case: structure, conduct, and performance

Article Abstract:

Bringing an antitrust suit involving claims that are decided through the rule of reason, as opposed to per se violations, dictates that counsel introduce evidence of both the defendant's conduct and the market conditions that it and its competitors face. Expert testimony on monopolistic conduct must be based on an industry study that focuses on industry structure, conduct patterns and performance characteristics. Scale economies and price comparisons should also be included in the economic analysis.

Author: Mueller, Charles E.
Publisher: Antitrust Law & Economics Review, Inc.
Publication Name: Antitrust Law and Economics Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0003-6048
Year: 1995
Methods, Evidence, Expert, Expert evidence

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Bill Gates and antitrust negligence in America: a failure of public policy

Article Abstract:

The Microsoft monopoly has generated much comment on various Internet discussion lists in the 1990s. Given the blatant unfairness of the monopoly involved, the software industry's technical people were confident that the courts would quickly grant them relief. This did not happen, as Microsot CEO Bill Gates knew the DC Circuit Court to be on his side with the Reagan-appointed judges enemies of antitrust.

Author: Mueller, Charles E.
Publisher: Antitrust Law & Economics Review, Inc.
Publication Name: Antitrust Law and Economics Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0003-6048
Year: 1997
Microsoft Corp., MSFT

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Cases, Antitrust law, United States
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: The effect of a violation of the LMRDA on the outcome of an election. How to hold a union election and stay out of trouble
  • Abstracts: It's looking good; all that timidity in the early '90s has created opportunities now. Corporate legal ranks withstand slowdown; where the numbers did fall, they rarely reflected mass layoffs - so far
  • Abstracts: Market power in antitrust. Innovations in antitrust enforcement. Is the glass half-empty or half-full?: reflections on the Kodak case
  • Abstracts: Final Chapter 14 regulations refine estate freeze rules. Sale to a defective grantor trust: an alternative to a GRAT
  • Abstracts: A drive to stifle litigation: Chrysler tries to slam door on class actions it calls frivolous with a lawsuit and a request for sanctions
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.