Regulation of Business - Antitrust Laws - Exemption of Agricultural Cooperative

Authors

Dean L. Berry S.Ed., University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

Defendant agricultural cooperative, organized under the authority of section 6 of the Clayton Act and section I of the Capper- Volstead Act, engaged in alleged predatory practices claimed by the government to constitute an attempt to monopolize and lessen competition within the ban of the Sherman and Clayton Acts. In a civil action by the government setting forth three separate claims for relief from such activities, held, the first cause of action, alleging monopoly, dismissed on the merits. In the absence of a combination or conspiracy with persons who are not within the purview of the Clayton and Capper-Volstead Acts, the business activities of an agricultural cooperative are exempt from action under the antitrust laws. United States v. Maryland and Virginia Milk Producers Assn., (D.C. D.C. 1958) 167 F. Supp. 45. But in a treble-damage action based on similar facts on defendant-cooperative's motion for summary judgment, held, motion denied. The grants of certain exemptions to agricultural cooperatives do not make predatory practices aimed at monopoly lawful, nor do they preclude a person injured by such practices from bringing a private suit. April v. National Cranberry Assn., (D.C. Mass. 1958) 168 F. Supp. 919.

Recommended Citation

Dean L. Berry S.Ed., Regulation of Business - Antitrust Laws - Exemption of Agricultural Cooperative, 57 Mich. L. Rev. 921 (1959).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol57/iss6/12