Restoring Effective Enforcement of the Anti-trust Laws: Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Monopolies and Commercial Law of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Ninety-sixth Congress, First Session, on H.R. 2060 and H.R 2204 and Other Proposals ... February 27, March 7, and April 10, 1979

Front Cover

From inside the book

Other editions - View all

Common terms and phrases

Popular passages

Page 129 - That any person who shall be injured in his business or property by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws may sue therefor in any district court of the United States in the district in which the defendant resides or is found or has an agent, without respect to the amount in controversy, and shall recover threefold the damages by him sustained, and the cost of suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee.
Page 286 - gist of the question of standing" is whether the party seeking relief has "alleged such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to assure that concrete adverseness which sharpens the presentation of issues upon which the court so largely depends for illumination of difficult constitutional questions.
Page 245 - The Sherman Act was designed to be a comprehensive charter of economic liberty, aimed at preserving free and unfettered competition as the rule of trade.
Page 377 - The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more industrious and less informed part of the community.
Page 169 - Proidna duly authorized, for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration...
Page 455 - In order to fall within § 2, the monopolist must have both the power to monopolize, and the intent to monopolize. To read the passage as demanding any "specific," intent, makes nonsense of it, for no monopolist monopolizes unconscious of what he is doing.
Page 452 - The carrier ought not to be allowed to retain his illegal profit, and the only one who can take it from him is the one that alone was in relation with him, and from whom the carrier took the sum.
Page 439 - The constant tendency of the courts is to find some way in which damages can be awarded where a wrong has been done. Difficulty of ascertainment is no longer confused with right of recovery' for a proven invasion of the plaintiff's rights.
Page 455 - It is not the form of the combination or the particular means used but the result to be achieved that the statute condemns. It is not of importance whether the means used to accomplish the unlawful objective are in themselves lawful or unlawful.
Page 455 - [t]he authorities support the view that the material consideration in determining whether a monopoly exists is not that prices are raised and that competition actually is excluded but that power exists to raise prices or to exclude competition when it is desired to do so," 328 US, at 811 (emphasis added), and quoted with approval from United States v.

Bibliographic information