Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Ross-Simmons Hardwood Lumber C

Docket No.: 05-381
Certiorari Granted: Jun 26 2006
Argued: November 28, 2006
Decided: February 20, 2007

Topics:

Antitrust, Indians, Robinson-Patman Act, Sherman Act

PartyNames: Weyerhaeuser Company v. Ross-Simmons Hardwood Lumber Company, Inc.
Petitioner: Weyerhaeuser Co.
Respondent: Ross-Simmons Hardwood Lumber C

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Weyerhaeuser Co.
v.
Ross-Simmons Hardwood Lumber C
549 U.S. 312 (2007)
Question Presented:

In Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco orp., 509 U.S. 209 (1993), the Court held that an antitrust plaintiff alleging predatory selling must prove that the defendant (I) sold its product at a price level too low to cover its costs and (2) had a dangerous probability of recouping its losses once the scheme of predation succeeded. The question in this case is whether a plaintiff alleging predatory buying may, as the Ninth Circuit held, establish liability by persuading a jury that the defendant purchased more inputs "than it needed" or paid a higher price for those inputs "than necessary," so as "to prevent the Plaintiffs from obtaining the [inputs] they needed at a fair price"; or whether the plaintiff instead must satisfy what the Ninth Circuit termed the "higher" Brooke Group standard by showing that the defendant (I) paid so much for raw materials that the price at which it sold its products did not coyer its costs and (2) had a dangerous probability of recouping its losses.

Holding: judgment vacated and remanded
Vote: 9-0
Opinion By:
Read WEYERHAEUSER CO. V. ROSS-SIMMONS HARDWOOD LUMBER C opinion (PDF)

Read opinion
Database Connection failed: SQLSTATE[HY000] [1045] Access denied for user 'restauz8_sophi'@'localhost' (using password: YES)