Legal Opinion
United States v. Andreas
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided December 30, 1998No. 96 CR 762PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
MANNING, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
In late 1996, the court began a journey in search of the truth behind what really happened at the Archer Daniels Midland Company(ADM) when it entered the international lysine market, in 1991. That is, were ADM executives Michael D. Andreas, Mark E. Whitacre, and Terrance S. Wilson guilty of price-fixing in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1? The journey ended on September 17, 1998, when a jury convicted all three defendants of conspiring to fix the global price and allocate the sales volume of lysine. 1
The…
2Cases cited58 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Rakas v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Kastigar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Huddleston v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Freedom Holdings Inc. v. SpitzerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004
- Archer Daniels Midland Co. v. WhitacreDistrict Court, C.D. Illinois · 1999
- Freedom Holdings Inc. v. Eliot SpitzerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004