Law Commons^™

Antitrust, Jeffrey S. Cashdan, Christine A. Hopkinson

Mercer Law Review

This Article surveys substantive antitrust decisions issued between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2013, by the United States Supreme Court for cases that originated in the Eleventh Circuit, by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, and by the United States district courts within the Eleventh Circuit.

Securities Regulation, David K. Brown, Derek B. Swanson

Mercer Law Review

This Article examines significant cases originating in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit during 2012 and 2013 under the Securities Act of 1933 (the Securities Act or 1933 Act), the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act or 1934 Act), and the rules promulgated thereunder. In particular, Part I of this Article addresses a recent decision involving alleged material misstatements in connection with an initial public offering. Part II analyzes a recent case addressing the loss-causation element of a claim of fraud under United States securities law, namely, under § 10(b)r of the Exchange Act …

Ashcroft In A Defendant's Wonderland: Redefined Pleading Standards In Ashcroft V. Iqbal, Cassidy M. Flake

Mercer Law Review

The United States Supreme Court's decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal is the Court's awaited clarification of its earlier decision in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly. In the wake of Twombly, courts and commentators debated its application to cases other than antitrust disputes. The Court announced in Iqbal that the Twombly complaint requirement of facial plausibility applies to all civil actions filed in federal court, not just antitrust cases. Accordingly, Iqbal currently governs the standards by which all plaintiffs in federal court must draft complaints to state a legally sufficient claim for relief and survive a defendant's motion to …

Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. V. Psks, Inc.: Loosening The Belt On Price Fixing, Crystal J. Clark

Mercer Law Review

In Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc., the United States Supreme Court overturned almost a century of antitrust precedent by overruling Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co. and holding that vertical minimum resale price maintenance agreements were no longer per se illegal but would now be governed by the rule of reason.

Antitrust, Michael Eric Ross

Mercer Law Review

The Eleventh Circuit's 1999 term was unremarkable for its antitrust jurisprudence. The court published only three antitrust decisions.

Morton's Market, Inc. v. Gustafson's Dairy, Inc. 198 F.3d 823 (11th Cir. 1999); Lowell v. American Cyanamid Co., 177 F.3d 1228 (11th Cir. 1999); MCA Television Ltd. v. Public Interest Corp., 171 F.3d 1265 (11th Cir. 1999). A fourth decision, Laker Airways, Inc. v. British Airways, PLC, 182 F.3d 843 (11th Cir. 1999), involved an antitrust action, but the opinion concerned application of FED. R. CIV. P. 19 and did not turn on application of substantive antitrust law. …

Antitrust, Michael Eric Ross, Jeffrey S. Cashdan

Mercer Law Review

In 1998 the Eleventh Circuit published eight antitrust opinions. Some of these cases turned on procedural issues; some were decided on the merits. As in previous years, defendants generally were successful, but not always. Each of these decisions is briefly summarized below.

Southern Card & Novelty, Inc. v. Lawson Mardon Label, Inc. concerned the legality of a "full-line forcing" arrangement. Defendant, Lawson Mardon Label, Inc. ("Lawson"), manufactured postcards, which it sold to distributors throughout North America for resale to retail outlets, which in turn sold them to consumers. Lawson manufactured "local view" postcards depicting nonlicensed local images (for example, …

Antitrust, Michael Eric Ross, Jeffrey S. Cashdan

Mercer Law Review

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals published only four antitrust decisions in 1997. Two of these cases were decided on procedural grounds and two on substantive grounds. Once again, defendants prevailed in most of these cases, including an action brought by the Government to enjoin an acquisition.

Antitrust, Michael Eric Ross, Jeffrey S. Cashdan

Mercer Law Review

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued seven antitrust decisions in 1996. Only one opinion addressed substantive antitrust issues. The others turned on procedural or immunity grounds. Antitrust defendants continued their dominance on appeal, prevailing in all but one action.

Why Coercion Should Be A Defense In Section 1 Cases Involving Vertical Agreements, Chad Plumley

Mercer Law Review

In recent years, antitrust analysis has shifted from historical reasons for wanting to stop agreements in restraint of trade, such as promotion of individual competition, to a more economic based analysis which focuses on efficiency and output. This change in analysis has impacted how coercion is viewed in antitrust analysis. Traditionally, courts looked at whether a party had been coerced to determine if there was a violation of the Sherman Act. In section 1 cases, where the emphasis is on whether there is an agreement, courts have used evidence of coercion to find an agreement between the parties even when …

Antitrust, Michael Eric Ross

Mercer Law Review

The Eleventh Circuit handed down only two antitrust decisions in 1994. Both affirmed judgments for defendants under the "state action" doctrine.

Antitrust, Michael Eric Ross

Mercer Law Review

The Eleventh Circuit handed down only two antitrust decisions in 1992. It was by far the lowest number of antitrust cases in any calendar year since the court was created in 1981. Nonetheless, both antitrust opinions last year were solidly reasoned and squarely in line with the current state of antitrust law.

Antitrust, Carl W. Mullis Iii

Mercer Law Review

In 1991, the Eleventh Circuit ruled on eight full-blown federal antitrust decisions. Although the courts below found for defendants in each of these cases, the Eleventh Circuit found primarily for plaintiffs in three of the cases, for defendants in four of the cases, and for both plaintiffs and defendants in one case. Several of the cases are significant in that they either explore new areas in the antitrust law or have the potential for nationwide influence. Most of the cases simply build on previous holdings of the Eleventh Circuit and are well reasoned. One or two cases, however, contain some …

Antitrust, Michael Eric Ross

Mercer Law Review

The antitrust docket of the Eleventh Circuit last year mirrored the general state of antitrust law in several respects. It included only five full blown decisions, three involved health care, and defendants had won below in all five cases. On the other hand, the Eleventh Circuit went against the antitrust grain in 1990 by finding for plaintiffs in three of its five opinions and again refusing to be mesmerized by contemporary economic arguments. Moreover, a few of the Eleventh Circuit's specific antitrust holdings rendered last term might fairly be questioned.

This Article discusses each of the Eleventh Circuit's 1990 antitrust …

Multiple Listing Services And The Sherman Act: Fifth Circuit Applies "Facial" Rule Of Reason Analysis, D.R. Jones

Mercer Law Review

In United States v. Realty Multi-List, Inc., the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals became the first federal appellate court to address the issue of whether the use of certain membership criteria by a real estate multiple listing service violates antitrust law. Judge Goldberg enunciated a three stage framework of analysis that allows for justification of a challenged practice, and requires proof of only potential, not actual, anticompetitive effects. Applying this test, the court held that the defendant multiple listing service's membership criteria, although not per se illegal, were facially unreasonable, and that the use of these criteria led to …

Antitrust, Kurt A. Strasser

Mercer Law Review

In 1980 there were twenty-one antitrust related opinions in the Fifth Circuit. This is about the number of opinions of each of the last few years. Overall, evidentiary and procedural questions were prominent. However, two cases did articulate new analytical structures for existing substantive law. These were, respectively, application of a new approach to evaluating conduct traditionally labelled as business torts,' and an attempt to articulate a "facial" rule of reason to supplement the traditional dichotomy of the per se rule and the rule of reason.' In addition, 1980 saw a substantial decline in the number and importance of cases …

Antitrust, Michael Eric Ross, John C. Staton Jr.

Mercer Law Review

In broadest terms, the performance of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit' in the antitrust area ' during 1976 might best be characterized as solid. Although demonstrating little of the innovative yet well-reasoned analysis which distinguished several 1975 decisions, none of this year's antitrust opinions appear to be as susceptible to criticism as were, for example, Eastex Aviation, Inc. v. Sperry & Hutchinson Co. and Cooper Liquor, Inc. v. Adolph Coors Co. Indeed, a substantial portion of the "development" of the substantive law in 1976 consisted of the court's attempts to "clarify" some of the implications …

Antitrust And State Action: Lights Out For A Regulated Utility, Richard W. Pierce

Mercer Law Review

In Cantor v. Detroit Edison, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a power utility regulated by the State of Michigan is not immune from federal antitrust liability, even though the Michigan Public Service Commission had approved the utility's activity under attack-a light-bulb program for customers-and the utility by state law had to maintain the program until it filed a new tariff with the Commission.

The Economic Effects Of Monopoly: A Lawyer's Guide To Antitrust Economics, David R. Kamerschen

Mercer Law Review

Four factors were influential in my decision to write this survey paper summarizing what economists believe theoretically and have found empirically to be the major economic (and noneconomic) effects of monopoly. First, in my work as an expert witness in antitrust cases representing both private parties and public bodies, I have found a glaring lacuna in the minds of some judges, a number of lawyers and most jurors in the area of antitrust economics. Second, this feeling has been fortified by my guest lectures in antitrust law courses; while the students are bright and the teacher dedicated, an acceptable level …

An Old Problem In A Modern Guise: Chain Stores And Efficient Integration Under The Sherman Act, William H. Stanford Jr.

Mercer Law Review

Horizontal or vertical integration affords a means for the elimination of competition, and for the expansion of monopoly power which already exists. When a business makes or sells more than one product the business is horizontally integrated. When it transfers goods or services, which could be sold in the market, without making great changes from one of its departments to another, it is called a vertically integrated firm. Advantages of large-scale vertical and horizontal integration have been clearly revealed in criminal prosecutions by the Department of Justice against A & P and its two largest competitors. These chains are integrated …

The Unwary Purchaser In Unfair Trade Cases, Julius R. Lunsford Jr.

Mercer Law Review

In cases involving the sale of real estate, the legal maxim "Caveat Emptor" (Let the buyer beware) is applicable. In sales of personal property substantially the same rule applies.' The buyer in unfair trade cases is not confronted with such a burden and assumes the status of a "bona fide purchaser for value" in its true and literal meaning. Generally speaking courts do not decide unfair trade cases by the caveat emptor rule of buyer and seller.