Search

The jurisdiction of courts and agencies frequently overlap, and the doctrine of primary jurisdiction is an attempt to allocate issues and remedies between these forums. Professor Jaffe traces the areas of interaction, and emphasizes that referral from court to agency must be based not solely on deference to agency expertness, but on the entire statutory scheme. Particularly relevant is the pervasiveness of the scheme of regulation administered by the agency. The author gives special attention to the application of the antitrust laws to the regulated industries and to recent Supreme Court decisions in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examines the role of state law in federal antitrust treble damage actions in the U.S. Analysis of the decisional law; Considerations in choosing between state and federal law; Criteria for making the choice which may be particularly applicable to antitrust statutes.

Discusses a number of statutes in the United States. Amendment to the Federal Communications Act which exempts certain news programs from equal-time provisions; Restraint of trade; Clayton Act amendment which makes Section 11 Cease-and-Desist Orders final unless appealed.

The article focuses on the 1958 case State Wholesale Grocers v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., which was registered under the Robinson-Patman Act of restraint of trade law. It was a case of violation of section 2(d) of the act, which relates to advertisements by suppliers in national magazine distributed exclusively by customer. The defendant, suppliers of Atlantic & Pacific (A&P) advertised their products in "Woman's Day, a magazine published by a wholly-owned subsidiary of A&P. In all but one state the magazine was distributed exclusively through A&P stores. The advertisements, identical to those appearing in other national magazines, made no specific reference to the fact that the products were on sale in A&P.

Focuses on the extra territorial application of the antitrust laws. Details of the "United States V. Imperial Chemical Industries, Ltd.," an antitrust suit brought against Du Pont; View of the foreign elements involved in particular activities; Contention of the advocates of a strict territorial concept of international law that the antitrust statutes should be construed as applicable only to those violations occurring within the United States.

The article focuses on the current status of corporate directors' right to indemnification. Moreover, a director serving what he conceives to be the best interests of his corporation may, like any other agent, incur substantial personal liability to third persons, including the government. Instances are not wanting in which directors, furthering with perhaps excessive zeal the purposes of their corporation, have found themselves the subject of criminal proceedings under the revenue or antitrust laws.

The article focuses on developments in the law trade-marks and unfair competition. In a competitive economy where each manufacturer seeks to maintain or improve his market position, the devices which facilitate his task are of great social and economic importance. Superiority of goods is not itself sufficient, for the manufacturer must find a way of impressing the identity of his product on the public consciousness. Through a symbol associated with his goods, the trade-mark, he finds a legally protected means to this end.

The article reports that it has now become a commonplace to observe that all American business is divided into two parts - the regulated and the unregulated. This generalization, while it is not strictly true because all business is subject to some form of government control, does express a meaningful dichotomy. Vast areas of American business life-public utilities and transportation are the best examples - are under detailed and continuous regulation. Still larger segments of American industrial and commercial activity are largely unregulated.

Discusses the use of government antitrust judgments as evidence in private actions in the U.S. Assistance for the victim of predatory business practices in the notoriously difficult task of proof in antitrust actions; Effectiveness of the treble-damage action as a deterrent against practices proscribed by the antitrust laws; Use of judgments and decrees in criminal and civil antitrust actions brought by the Government against the defendants.

This article presents information on legal notes related to cases in the U.S. Proof of Cost Differentials Under the Robinson-Patman Act discusses a seller who discriminates in price among his customers and may justify the discrimination by showing that it makes "only due allowance for differences in the cost of manufacture, sale, or delivery resulting from the differing methods or quantities in which such commodities are to such purchasers sold or delivered." The Robinson-Patman Act creates a private cause of action and the injured party is entitled to treble damages as under the other antitrust laws. It was not until 1949, however, that any extensive cost defense was attempted.

This article focuses on the current status of the monopoly problem in the U.S. There have always been at least two ways of looking at competition and of judging the effectiveness of competition in a particular market. In the first, competition is thought of as a type of market organization setting severe limits to the power or control exercised by the individual firm. This view stresses the limits, set principally by the number of his competitors, on the scope of action of a single seller or buyer. The relation of monopoly and competition to innovation is a relatively unknown area.

Provides information on the Act of the U.S. Congress of July 2, 1890, entitled "An Act to Protect Trade and Commerce against Unlawful Restraints and Monopolies. Prohibitions of the Act; Classification of the cases arising under the law; Provisions of the Act on the monopolizing of the manufacture or of the ownership of articles of trade or commerce.

Discusses the legal aspect of monopoly in the United States. Relationship between monopoly and competition; Argument that monopoly may be accomplished in more than one way, though no doubt the method by which most of the large corporations are formed is by the combination or union of former competitor, and not merely by individual growth; Definition of common law contracts in restraint of trade; Validity of restrictive covenants accompanying the sale of a business; Principle that contracts of sale between competitors will not be enforced by the courts if the direct result of their enforcement will be to give control of the market to the purchaser.

Discusses several issues related to the lawsuit against Northern Securities Co. in the U.S. Question on the commitment of a misdemeanor by the company under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act; Provision to make it illegal to make a contract in restraint of trade or commerce among several states; Application of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act on the lawsuit.

The article focuses on the rights of the legislatures of the several states and the Congress of the United States in the regulation of contracts, combinations, conspiracies, and monopolies in restraint of trade and commerce. It has been affirmed that an amendment to the Constitution of the United States is necessary in order to vest in the U.S. Congress the requisite power to enable it to deal with the subject. The article demonstrate that there is already existing in Congress a large and extensive power, which it is believed is sufficient without the amendment proposed, and, further, to define the extent of that power.

Focuses on decision of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the Northern Securities case. Facts of the case; Analysis on provisions of restraint of trade; Assessment on laws governing freedom of trade.

Examines the decision of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the eight circuit in "U.S. v. Northern Securities Company" and the application of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Overview of the legislation; Facts and information of the case; Application of the terms and provisions of the legislation to the case.

This article focuses on fraud as an unfair competition. No branch of the law has undergone a more interesting development within the past fifty years than that which deals with the subject of unfair competition. The proposition that nobody has any right to represent his goods as the goods of somebody else has been adopted as the basis of all the recent decisions' in England dealing with the passing off of one trader's wares as those of another. It is thoroughly consistent and equitable, that a defendant who cannot set up absence of a fraudulent intent as a bar to an injunction, should be nevertheless allowed to prove it in exemption from damages or an accounting.

The article presents several legal cases from various parts of the world. A decision of the supreme court of Alabama is instructive in its relation to the question of unfair competition. The plaintiff, a water company, filed a bill against the city of Mobile, a corporation operating a system of waterworks and sewers for itself and its inhabitants. The bill alleged that the defendant unjustly discriminated against the patrons of the plaintiff by charging them the same price for sewerage service alone, that it charged the public for water and sewerage service together, thereby causing the patrons of the plaintiff to discontinue taking the plaintiff's water. The dividing line between fair and unfair competition has never been clearly indicated and it is impossible to mark it off with anything like precision. The trade mark and trade name cases show that the deceiving of the public by the counterfeiting or simulation of the plaintiff's goods resulting in his damage may be enjoined by him.

The article reports on the constitutionality of the Sherman anti-trust act of 1890. The decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of the Trans-Missouri Traffic Association for the first time authoritatively declares the intended scope of the provisions of the so called Anti-Trust Act of 1890. In view of such interpretation of the statute, it is now the legal presumption that it was the intention of Congress to prohibit and render criminal every contract in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States or with foreign nations.

Examines the cases involving unfair competition in the United States. Law of trade marks; Typical cases of unfair competition such as "Knott v. Morgan"; "Hennessy v. Hogan"; Notion of property in good will and the constituent parts of good will; Attempt by a person to appropriate to himself the benefit of some one or another of the constituent parts that go to make up the good will of a business.

Discusses the qui tam actions in section 4901 of the Revised Statutes of the United States which is part of the Acts relating to Patents. Goal of punishing persons who fraudulently attempt to impose upon the public the belief that they are enjoying a monopoly in the articles so marked; Observation that only a person can be an informer upon the statute; Classification of the actions under the statute as actions in the nature of tort.

Examines the notion of monopoly under the Anti-Trust Act, passed by the United States Congress on July 2, 1890. Interpretation of the statute in the light of the common law; Definition of a monopoly; Engrossing; Results of leading decisions regarding monopoly; Indefinite increase of business; Fixing of arbitrary prices; Agreement not to trade with any one who trades with others than the convenantors.

Presents some notes on legal issues in the United States. Harvard law school; Lost grants; Issue on whether electricity is within the principle of "Fletcher v. Rylands"; Restraint of trade.

Comments on the proposal of the United States Supreme Court to prevent unfair competition in business. Implementation of a copyright act; Offer of privileges to the foreign yagabond; Direction of enlightened thought to promote the intellectual and ethical progress of the nation.

This article focuses on the antitrust activity in the field of professional sports. The introduction of television and the multimillion-dollar scope of professional sports raised problems concerning the economic nature of such enterprises. Questions were raised about restrictive practices which limited competition within the various types of professional sports. The crux of the problem lies in the definition of "interstate commerce" as the term is interpreted by the courts. Unless professional sports are engaged in interstate commerce, the legality of any of their monopolistic arrangements cannot be questioned under the federal antitrust laws. The antitrust status of professional sports received further attention from Congress in 1954, when a move developed in the Senate to force baseball to sever all ties with business concerns that were subject to the antitrust laws. Confusion was compounded in 1955 when the Supreme Court was asked to rule on the status of professional boxing. The Antitrust Division contended that the International Boxing Club of New York had conspired to monopolize the promotion and exhibition of championship boxing bouts.

Focuses on the choice of law in multistate unfair competition in the U.S. Impact of the growing complexity of product distribution on the common law tort of unfair competition; Role of the uniformity of substantive law in the oldest segment of unfair competition on the diversity of substantive rules; Influence of unfair competition to the requirement of examination and application of the law of every state.

Addresses problems on evolving controls among class of managers in a modern corporation. Liability for personal exploitation of corporate opportunities; Need for recognizing the inherent conflict of interests; Obligations for engaging in a competing business.

Discusses the factors that influence courts to refuse to act on legal actions relating to unfair competition. Review of judicial decisions and legal opinion on the subject matter; Reluctance of courts to recognize the use of trademarks in commerce; Consideration for the scope of protection, policies against monopolies, the management of trade practices by administrative agencies, and the policy in favor of centralizing the protection of morality in government.

This article presents information on judicial cases related to commercial crimes in the U.S. One of the case is related to payment of principal's debt with embezzled money. A county treasurer, who was also cashier of a bank, had secretly embezzled from the county money which was to have been used to pay off a county note. Before the note fell due, he embezzled money from" the bank, which he used to pay the note, thus concealing his defalcations as county treasurer. The plaintiffs, county commissioners, sued his administrator and the surety on his official bond. The bank was made a party defendant. From a judgment for the plaintiffs, the surety appealed. Held, that the plaintiffs may recover from the surety, since one whose property is fraudulently taken may follow and recover it until it reaches a bona fide purchaser. The Judgment was affirmed in Wood v. Citizens' Bank.

This article presents information on law legislation in the U.S. The common law crime of cheating has never been deemed broad enough to embrace this evil. There has also existed in some states' a type of enactment; commonly referred to as a "confidence game" statute, which penalizes specified kinds of false pretenses, including false and bogus checks. Prior to 1905, however, only a scattering handful of jurisdictions had enacted legislation primarily and exclusively concerned with the issuance of checks without funds. As the frequency and facility with which such frauds were perpetrated became increasingly apparent, this number was slowly augmented.

Considers the common-law rules governing market conduct in the U.S. Doctrine of contracts in retraint of trade; Doctrine of conspiracy to monopolize; Doctrine of unfair competition; Background on the Sherman Act designed to prevent industrial combination.

Examines the Sherman Act, which has given the federal government an opportunity to deal through its judicial department with contracts, combinations, and conspiracies in restraint of trade, monopolies, and attempts to monopolize. First sentence of the act which declares certain contracts, combinations, and conspiracies to be illegal generally; Lack of explicit provision that the acts of monopolizing or attempting to monopolize are generally illegal; Analysis of whether the prohibition of the act apply to every contract, combination, and conspiracy which is in restraint of trade, according to the literal significance of those words; Principal difficulty in applying the Sherman Act.

The article presents information on the trademark infringement. The designation "unfair competition" or "unfair trade" seems to have been adopted as a convenient description of offences against commercial morals not included in trademark infringement. It was for many years assumed that unless a technical trademark was violated, no relief could be had. It was soon demonstrated that the acceptance of any such rule opened the door to all manner of commercial knavery, and at an early day judges with consciences and a proper sense of sportsmanship began to decide cases in favor of the complainant which were in no sense trade mark cases, but where the defendant's conduct involved precisely the same wrong--the sale of one trader's goods as those of another.

In this article the argues that it is an astonishing fact that the authorship' of the Statute of Frauds in the U.S. has not in the past been wholly clear, and will never perhaps be fully known, and it is even more strange that there has been a long standing misapprehension as to the exact date of its passage. As late as 1884, writer James Schouler discussed the date of the passage of the Statute of Frauds as one of probabilities and concluded that it must have been passed in 1676. The purpose of Schouler's argument was to justify the view that legislator Matthew Hale, played a preeminent part in shaping the Statute of Frauds.