When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Rice v. Norman Williams Co. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice_v._Norman_Williams_Co.

    Rice v. Norman Williams Co., 458 U.S. 654 (1982), was a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court involving the preemption of state law by the Sherman Act.The Supreme Court held, in a 9–0 decision, that the Sherman Act did not invalidate a California law prohibiting the importing of spirits not authorized by the brand owner.

  3. Sherman Antitrust Act - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act

    Hostetter, in which the Court rejected a facial Sherman Act preemption challenge to a statute requiring that persons selling liquor to wholesalers affirm that the price charged was no higher than the lowest price at which sales were made anywhere in the United States during the previous month. Since the attack was a facial one, and the state ...

  4. Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copperweld_Corp._v...

    Because the Sherman Act does not prohibit unreasonable restraints of trade as such - but only restraints effected by a contract, combination, or conspiracy - it leaves untouched a single firm's anticompetitive conduct (short of threatened monopolization) that may be indistinguishable in economic effect from the conduct of two firms subject to ...

  5. Apple is being sued for allegedly creating a monopoly. Learn ...

    www.aol.com/apple-being-sued-allegedly-creating...

    The US Justice Department along with 16 states on Thursday filed an 88-page antitrust lawsuit against Apple for violating antitrust laws. Apple allegedly violated the Sherman Antitrust Act by ...

  6. Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspen_Skiing_Co._v._Aspen...

    A jury in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado found that Ski Co. maintained its monopoly through anticompetitive means in violation of the Sherman Act. [16] The District Court awarded Highlands $7,500,000 in treble damages, costs, attorneys' fees and issued a temporary injunction requiring revival of the All-Aspen ...

  7. Parker immunity doctrine - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_immunity_doctrine

    There is no suggestion of a purpose to restrain state action in the Act's legislative history." [15] The Sherman Act was passed "in the era of 'trusts' and of 'combinations' of businesses and of capital organized and directed to control of the market by suppression of competition in the marketing of goods and services, the monopolistic tendency ...

  8. United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Association - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Trans...

    United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Association, 166 U.S. 290 (1897), was a United States Supreme Court case holding that the Sherman Act (which was an antitrust measure that prohibited anticompetitive behavior in commerce) applied to the railroad industry, even though the U.S. Congress had enacted a comprehensive regime of regulations for that industry.

  9. United States v. American Tobacco Co. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._American...

    United States v. American Tobacco Company, 221 U.S. 106 (1911), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that the combination in this case is one in restraint of trade and an attempt to monopolize the business of tobacco in interstate commerce within the prohibitions of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890.