Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Kimmel, Sheldon
Year of Publication: 
Series/Report no.: 
EAG Discussion Paper No. EAG 06-7
U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, Economic Analysis Group (EAG), Washington, DC
Most scholars believe the Supreme Court dropped its per se rule against price-fixing in Appalachian Coals (1933), re-instituting that rule in Socony-Vacuum (1940), but that the rule ignored "reasonableness" until BMI (1979), and that Maricopa (1982) relied on Socony to step back from "reasonableness" again. However, the view that Socony's per se rule had nothing to do with "reasonableness" came from unreasonably ignoring Socony's comments on Appalachian Coals, which came from misunderstanding Appalachian Coals by ignoring the economic implications of the facts the district court found. Those implications show that Appalachian Coals, Socony, and BMI all gave the same price-fixing rule.
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:

Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.