US SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

UNITED STATES V. SEALY, INC., 388 U. S. 350 (1967)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 388 U. S. 350

U.S. Supreme Court

United States v. Sealy, Inc., 388 U.S. 350 (1967)

United States v. Sealy, Inc.

No. 9

Argued April 20, 1967

Decided June 12, 1967

388 U.S. 350

Syllabus

The United States brought this civil action for violation of § 1 of the Sherman Act against appellee, the owner of the trademarks for Sealy branded mattresses and bedding products which it licensed manufacturers in various parts of the country to produce and sell under a territorial allocation system. Sealy agreed with each licensee not to license anyone else to manufacture or sell in a designated area and the licensee agreed not to manufacture or sell Sealy products outside that area. The Sealy licensees own substantially all appellee's stock and control its day-to-day operations, including the assignment and termination of the exclusive territorial licenses. Appellee was charged with conspiring with its licensees to fix the prices at which their retail customers might resell Sealy products and to allocate mutually exclusive territories among the licensees. The District Court after trial enjoined appellee from price-fixing, and no appeal was taken. It also ruled that Sealy's allocation of territories to its licensees did not violate § 1, and the Government appealed from that holding.

Held:

1. The territorial allocations here are not vertical arrangements imposed by the licensor, but horizontal restraints arranged by the licensees.

"Sealy was a joint venture of, by, and for its stockholder-licensees . . . and [they] are themselves directly, without even the semblance of insulation, in charge of Sealy's operations."

White Motor Co. v. United States, 372 U. S. 253 (1963), distinguished. Pp. 388 U. S. 352-354.

2. The territorial restraints were a part of the unlawful price-fixing and policing activities of Sealy operating as an instrumentality of the licensees and constituted "an aggregation of trade restraints" which was illegal per se. Pp. 388 U. S. 354-358.

Reversed. chanrobles.com-red

Page 388 U. S. 351



























chanrobles.com



ChanRobles Legal Resources:

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com