United States v. Brims
Decision Date | 23 November 1926 |
Docket Number | No. 212,212 |
Citation | 47 S.Ct. 169,71 L.Ed. 403,272 U.S. 549 |
Parties | UNITED STATES v. BRIMS et al |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Mr. Assistant Attorney General Donovan, for the United States.
Messrs. Charles Maitland Beattie, of New York City, and Hope Thompson and Albert Fink, both of Chicago, Ill., for respondents.
Messrs. Robert W. Childs and Albert Fink, both of Chicago, Ill., for defendants Von Platon & Dick Co. and others.
Respondents were charged with engaging in a combination and conspiracy to restrain interstate trade and commerce contrary to inhibitions of the Sherman Act, c. 647, 26 Stat. 209 (Comp. St. § 8820 et seq.), and were found guilty by a jury. The Cir- cuit Court of Appeals reviewed and reversed the judgment of conviction upon the sole ground of fatal variance between allegation and proof, or failure of proof to support the charge. 6 F.(2d) 98. They said:
They considered no other objection to the judgment of conviction, and the cause came here by certiorari, because that point seemed to require further examination. We think it was wrongly decided.
The challenged combination and agreement related to the manufacture and installation in the city of Chicago of building material commonly known as millwork, which includes window and door fittings, sash, baseboard, molding, cornice, etc. The respondents were manufacturers of millwork in Chicago, building contractors who purchase and cause such work to be installed, and representatives of the carpenters' union whose members are employed by both manufacturers and contractors.
It appears that the respondent manufacturers found their business seriously impeded by the competition of material made by nonunion mills located outside of Illinois-mostly in Wisconsin and the South-which sold their product in the Chicago market cheaper than local manufacturers who employed union labor could afford to do. Their operations were thus abridged, and they did not employ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
American Medical Ass'n v. United States
...237, 61 S.Ct. at page 468, 85 L.Ed. 788. 46 United States v. Hutcheson, 312 U. S. 219, 232, 61 S.Ct. 463, 85 L.Ed. 788. 47 272 U.S. 549, 47 S.Ct. 169, 71 L.Ed. 403. 48 United States v. Hutcheson, 312 U. S. 219, 233, 61 S.Ct. 463, 85 L.Ed. 788. 49 New Negro Alliance v. Sanitary Grocery Co., ......
-
United States v. Eason Oil Co.
...67 L. Ed. 839; Coronado Coal Co. v. United Mine Workers, 268 U. S. 295, 45 S. Ct. 551, 556, 69 L. Ed. 963; United States v. Brims et al., 272 U. S. 549, 47 S. Ct. 169, 71 L. Ed. 403; Tagg Bros. & Moorhead et al. v. U. S., 280 U. S. 420, 50 S. Ct. 220, 74 L. Ed. 524. All these cases are easi......
-
Apex Hosiery Co v. Leader
...of those engaged in an industry as the means or instrument for suppressing competition or fixing prices. See United States v. Brims, 272 U.S. 549, 47 S.Ct. 169, 71 L.Ed. 403; Local 167 v. United States, 291 U.S. 293, 54 S.Ct. 396, 78 L.Ed. 804. Here it is plain that the combination or consp......
-
U.S. v. Abascal
... Page 821 ... 564 F.2d 821 ... 1 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 694 ... UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, ... Manuel Glenn ABASCAL, Appellant ... UNITED STATES of America, ... ...
-
Regulated Industries
...suggestion that the labor market is totally beyond the reach of the antitrust laws. 1502. 312 U.S. at 232 (citing United States v. Brims, 272 U.S. 549 (1926)). 1503. See H.A. Artists, 451 U.S. at 717 n.20 (“Of course a party seeking refuge in the statutory exemption must be a bona fide labo......
-
Table of Cases
...U.S. 188 (1939), 139, 214, 219, 224 United States v. Braniff Airways, Inc., 453 F. Supp. 724 (W.D. Tex. 1978), 309 United States v. Brims, 272 U.S. 549 (1926), 200 United States v. Brown University 5 F.3d 658 (3d Cir. 1993), 15, 16, 17, 307, 355 United States v. Chi. Title & Trust Co., 242 ......
-
Antitrust and Organized Labor
...suggestion that the labor market is totally beyond the reach of the antitrust laws. 39. 312 U.S. at 232 (citing United States v. Brims, 272 U.S. 549 (1926)). 40. 325 U.S. 797 (1945). 41. In that case, a union was alleged to have conspired with electrical contractors and electrical parts man......
-
The Economic Philosophy of Anti-Trust Legislation
...241 (1918); National Assn. of Window Glass Inc., 263 U. S. 291 (1923); Brims v. U. S., M’frs. v. U. S., 263 U. S. 403 (1923); U. S. v. 272 U. S. 549 (1926); Bedford Cut Stone Co., v. New York Coffee Exchange, 263 U. S. 611 (1924); Journeymen Stonecutters’ Assn. 274 U. S. 37 Maple Flooring M......