When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clayton_Antitrust_Act_of_1914

    The Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914 (Pub. L. 63–212, 38 Stat. 730, enacted October 15, 1914, codified at 15 U.S.C. §§ 12–27, 29 U.S.C. §§ 52–53), is a part of United States antitrust law with the goal of adding further substance to the U.S. antitrust law regime; the Clayton Act seeks to prevent anticompetitive practices in their incipiency.

  3. Hawaii v. Standard Oil Co. of California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaii_v._Standard_Oil_Co...

    Hawaii v. Standard Oil Co. of Cal., 405 U.S. 251 (1972), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that Section 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act does not authorize a U.S. state to sue for damages for an injury to its general economy allegedly attributable to a violation of the United States antitrust law.

  4. Duplex Printing Press Co. v. Deering - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duplex_Printing_Press_Co...

    Clayton Act Duplex Printing Press Co. v. Deering , 254 U.S. 443 (1921), is a United States Supreme Court case which examined the labor provisions of the Clayton Antitrust Act and reaffirmed the prior ruling in Loewe v.

  5. United States antitrust law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law

    First, Section 1 of the Sherman Act prohibits price fixing and the operation of cartels, and prohibits other collusive practices that unreasonably restrain trade. Second, Section 7 of the Clayton Act restricts the mergers and acquisitions of organizations that may substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly. Third, Section 2 ...

  6. History of United States antitrust law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_United_States...

    The 33 seldom competed with each other. The federal decision together with the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914 and the creation that years of the Federal Trade Commission largely de-escalated the antitrust rhetoric among progressives. [3] [4] The new framework after 1914 had little or no impact on the direction and magnitude of merger activity. [5]

  7. Standard Oil Co. v. United States (Standard Stations)

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Oil_Co._v._United...

    Standard Oil Co. v. United States, 337 U.S. 293 (1949), more commonly referred to as the Standard Stations case to distinguish it from a 1911 case with the same caption, Standard Oil Co. v. United States, is a 1947 decision of the United States Supreme Court in which requirements contracts for gasoline stations (Standard Stations) were held to violate section 3 of the Clayton Act. [1]

  8. AOL Mail

    mail.aol.com

    Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!

  9. United States v. Philadelphia National Bank - Wikipedia

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

    United States v. Philadelphia National Bank, 374 U.S. 321 (1963), also called the Philadelphia Bank case, was a 1963 decision of the United States Supreme Court that held Section 7 of the Clayton Act, as amended in 1950, [1] applied to bank mergers.