People v. Apostolos
| Decision Date | 05 March 1923 |
| Docket Number | 10289,10290. |
| Citation | 73 Colo. 71,213 P. 331 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. APOSTOLOS et al. SAME v. CRISSEY & FOWLER LUMBER CO. et al. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Error to District Court, El Paso County; Arthur Cornforth, Judge.
P. G Apostolos, with others, and the Crissey & Fowler Lumber Company, with others, were indicted for unlawful combination to increase the prices of commodities in violation of the Anti-Trust Act. Motions to quash indictments were sustained and the People of the State of Colorado bring error, under Rev. St. 1908, § 1997.
Quashing the indictments held error.
Victor E. Keyes, Atty.
Gen Samuel Chutkow, Asst. Atty. Gen. (John A. Carruthers, T. C Turner, and Willis L. Strachan, all of Colorado Springs, of counsel), for the People.
Certain persons were indicted under the so-called Anti-Trust Act (chapter 161, S. L. 1913). A motion to quash was sustained and the people bring the case here for review under R. S. 1908, § 1997. It will suffice to consider one count of one indictment. It alleges that----
The accused '(No. 10289) did then and there willfully and unlawfully combine to increase the price of certain merchandise and commodities in the city of Colorado Springs, to wit, the price of shoe repairs, sole leather and other commodities used in the making and repairing of shoes. * * *'
The statute provides that 'a trust is a combination * * * to increase or reduce the price of merchandise * * * or commodities,' or to do any of certain other defined acts, and then proceeds as follows:
'And all such combinations are hereby declared to be against public policy, unlawful and void; provided that no agreement or association shall be deemed to be unlawful or within the provisions of this act, the object and purposes of which are to conduct operations at a reasonable profit or to market at a reasonable profit those products which cannot otherwise be so marketed; provided further that it shall not be deemed to be unlawful, or within the provisions of this act, for persons, firms, or corporations engaged in the business of selling or manufacturing commodities of a similar or like character to employ, form, organize or own any interest in any association, firm or corporation having as its object or purpose the transportation, marketing or delivering of such commodities; and provided further that labor, whether skilled or unskilled, is not a commodity within the meaning of this act.'
The objection to the indictment according to the brief before us was that it did not negative the provisos. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cline v. Frink Dairy Co
...in the Colorado anti-trust law (Campbell v. People, 72 Colo. 213, 210 P. 841; Johnson v. People, 72 Colo. 218, 210 P. 843; People v. Apostolos, 73 Colo. 71; 213 P. 331), and we find nothing there which is in conflict with our construction of them. Such an exception in the statute leaves the......
-
People v. North Ave. Furniture and Appliance, Inc.
...that trade restraints in connection with service-oriented industries were subject to antitrust prosecution. See, e.g., People v. Apostolos, 73 Colo. 71, 213 P. 331 (1923) (shoe repair); Johnson v. People, 72 Colo. 218, 210 P. 843 (1922) (electrical contracting); Campbell v. People, 72 Colo.......
-
Beatrice Creamery Co. v. Cline
...them, and other well known methods. Neither in the Campbell Case nor in Johnson v. People, 72 Colo. 218, 210 P. 843, and People v. Apostolos, 73 Colo. 71, 213 P. 331, in all of which convictions under the Anti-Trust Act were sustained, did the Supreme Court consider the constitutionality of......
-
Whitfield v. People
... ... offense charged.' C. L.§ 7068; Campbell v. People, 210 P ... 841, 72 Colo. 213; Johnson v. People, 210 P. 843, 72 Colo ... 218; McConnell v. People, 213 P. 674, 73 Colo. 99; Tracy v ... People, 176 P. 280, 65 Colo. 226; People v. Apostolos, 213 P ... 331, 73 Colo. 71; Lambert v. People, 78 Colo. 313, 241 P ... 2. On ... the second point: It is said (a) that the evidence is ... insufficient to convict Whitfield or Steele, because Bond ... testified that he relied only on what Brodrick represented to ... him, and not ... ...