Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp.
Supreme Court of the United States
1Dissent
Justice Stevens, with whom Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall join,
dissenting.
It is safe to assume that corporate affiliates do not vigorously compete with one another. A price-fixing or market-allocation agreement between two or more such corporate entities does not, therefore, eliminate any competition that would otherwise exist. It makes no difference whether such an agreement is labeled a “contract,” a “conspiracy,” or merely a policy decision, because it surely does not unreasonably restrain competition within the meaning of the Sherman Act. The Rule of Reason has always given the…
2Cases cited51 opinions
- Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of CarpentersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- New Colonial Ice Co. v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- United States v. TurketteSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, Appts. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Illinois Brick Co. v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.