US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for

KIEFER-STEWART CO. V. SEAGRAM & SONS, INC., 340 U. S. 211 (1951)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 340 U. S. 211 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Kiefer-Stewart Co. v. Seagram & Sons, Inc., 340 U.S. 211 (1951)

Kiefer-Stewart Co. v. Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc.

No. 297

Argued December 8, 1950

Decided January 2, 1951

340 U.S. 211


1. An agreement among competitors in interstate commerce to fix maximum resale prices of their products violates the Sherman Act. P. 340 U. S. 213.

2. Under the Sherman Act, a combination formed for the purpose and with the effect of raising, depressing, fixing, pegging, or stabilizing the price of a commodity in interstate or foreign commerce is illegal per se. P. 340 U. S. 213.

3. The evidence in this case was sufficient to support a finding by the jury that respondents had conspired to fix maximum resale prices. Pp. 340 U. S. 213-214.

4. In an action under the Sherman Act for treble damages, brought by a complainant injured by a conspiracy of sellers of liquor in interstate commerce to fix maximum resale prices, it is no defense that the complainant had conspired with others to fix minimum prices for liquor in violation of the antitrust laws. P. 340 U. S. 214.

5. The fact that corporations are under common ownership and control does not relieve them from liability under the antitrust laws, especially where they hold themselves out as competitors. P. 340 U. S. 215.

6. Since the District Court's instructions to the jury submitted to them only the cause of action under the Sherman Act, it did not err in refusing a more formal withdrawal of an issue concerning a violation of the Clayton Act, which had been charged in the complaint but which was not proved. P. 340 U. S. 215.

182 F.2d 228, reversed.

In an action under the Sherman Act for treble damages, the jury returned a verdict for petitioner, and damages were awarded. The Court of Appeals reversed. 182 F.2d 228. This Court granted certiorari. 340 U.S. 863. Reversed, p. 340 U. S. 215. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 340 U. S. 212

ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™