Pazen v. Silver Rod Stores, Inc.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Heher, J.

The fundamental question is one of statutory construction —i. e., whether the purported contract is within the purview of R. S. 1937, 56:4-3, et seq., as amended by chapter 165 of the Laws of 1938 (P. L. p. 375), commonly known as the “Pair Trade Act,” or serves to restrain trade in the vicious sense, and is therefore void as in contravention of public policy. We find it to be in the latter category.

The agreement is between a “wholesaler” and a “retailer.” It fixes minimum retail prices for eighteen of the leading brands of cigarettes to be…