ASSIGNMENT
1.Magnum Company produces 77 percent of the coal utilized in the United States. Coal provides 25 percent of all of the energy used in the United States. In a suit brought by the United States against Magnum for violation of the antitrust laws, what result?
2. Justin Manufacturing Company sells high-fashion clothing under the prestigious “Justin” label. The company has a firm policy that it will not deal with any company that sells below its suggested retail price. Justin is informed by one of its customers, XYZ, that its competitor, Duplex, is selling the “Justin” line a a great discount. Justin now demands that Duplex comply with the agreement not to sell the “Justin” line below the suggested retail price. Discuss the implications of this situation.
3. Jay Corporation, the largest manufacturer of bicycles in the United States, with 40 percent of the market, has recently entered into an agreement with Retail Bike, the largest retailer of bicycles in the United States, with 37 percent of the market, under which Jay will furnish its bicycles only to Retail and Retail will sell only Jay’s bicycles. The government is now questioning this agreement. Discuss.
4. Whirlpool Corporation manufactured vacuum cleaners under both its own name and under the Kenmore name. Oreck exclusively distributed the vacuum cleaners sold under the Whirlpool name. Sears, Roebuck & Co. exclusively distributed the Kenmore vacuum cleaners. Oreck alleged that its exclusive distributorship agreement with Whirlpool was not renewed because of the existence of an unlawful conspiracy between Whirlpool and Sears. Oreck further contended that a per se rule was applicable because the agreement was (a) price fixing or (b) a group boycott or (c) both. Is Oreck correct? Why or why not?
5. Indian Coffee of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, marketed vacuum-packed coffee under the Breakfast Cheer brand name in the Pittsburgh and Cleveland, Ohio, areas. That same year, Folgers Coffee, a leading coffee seller, began selling coffee in Pittsburgh. To make inroads into the new territory, Folgers sold its coffee at greatly reduced prices. At first, Indian Coffee met Folgers’ prices, but could not continue operating at such a reduced price and was forced out of the market. Indian Coffee brings an antitrust action. Explain whether Folgers has violated the Sherman Antitrust Law.
