Exam 20: Antitrust Law

In Leegin Creative Leather Products v. PSKS, the Supreme Court held that minimum vertical price fixing controls (resale price maintenance) would be legal if it helped interbrand competition at the expense of intrabrand competition.

In Leegin Creative Leather Products v. PSKS, a maker of leather goods would not sell to stores that would not follow its pricing policy (resale price maintenance). The Supreme Court used the case to overturn the rule established a century before in:

In an antitrust case, the geographic market affected by a merger must be regional or national, not local, for the law to apply.

The Standard Oil Trust was found liable of a per se violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act for monopolizing trade.

Tie-in arrangements are allowed under which of the following conditions:

When a merger between two competitor firms is challenged, a strong defense would be that the merger will:

The Vertical Restraint Guidelines by the Justice Department hold that tying sales are usually viewed under a rule of reason approach.

Vertical restraints of trade are arrangements between:

Mayora is a retail clothing chain selling Pollo and other quality brand clothing. Mayora has very high prices, usually 30% over suggested retail price. Pollo tells Mayora it is fed up with this high pricing. Pollo tells Mayora to stop selling its products above list price or it will cut off sales to Mayora. Is this a possible violation of the antitrust laws?

In Leegin Creative Leather Products v. PSKS, the Supreme Court overturned the old rule from Dr. Miles Medical v. John D. Park and Sons case concerning resale price maintenance.

When horizontal competitors use a boycott to force a change in the nature of vertical business relationships, there is likely to be an illegal boycott.

In U.S. Steel v. Fortner Enterprises, the Supreme Court had to determine if a tie-in between the purchase of mobile homes and the financing of a land purchase violated the antitrust laws. The Court applied which test in making this determination?

A hospital requires that patients use the food services provided by one firm with which the hospital contracts. Pizza Hut wants to sell its food to patients in the hospital too, but the hospital refuses. Pizza Hut sues the hospital because of the tie-in between hospital stays and food service. The Supreme Court will probably hold the hospital's rule is:

Agreements intended to provide horizontal customer or territorial allocations may violate antitrust laws.

A seller is said to engage in price discrimination when the same product is sold to different buyers at different prices.

The Clayton Act was enacted in:

If a wholesaler refuses to do business with a retailer, this is an illegal boycott under the Clayton Act.

You have a book publishing company. You own a paper mill, a printing operation, and a bindery. Within your firm you produce the paper for your books, print the manuscripts, bind the finished product, edit the authors' work, and sell the books. You refuse to deal with any companies that could supply you these services. What problem(s) do you most likely have with the antitrust laws? You face:

A ____ means that the court looks at the facts surrounding business practice before deciding whether it helps or hurts competition.

Suppose Coca-Cola required anyone who wanted to distribute Coke products must to also purchase a new candy product that Coca-Cola manufactures. This practice would be: