Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
January 3, 1951
[*564] On April 9, 1947, nine corporations and seven individuals, constituting officers and directors of certain of the corporate defendants, [**2] were indicted on two counts, the second of which charged them with conspiring to monopolize certain portions of interstate commerce, in violation of Section 2 of the Anti-trust Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 2. The American City Lines having been dismissed, the remaining corporate and individual defendants were found guilty upon this count. From the judgment upon the verdict, the remaining eight corporate defendants and five of the individuals have perfected this appeal. They contend that the count fails to state an offense, that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict, that a fatal variance between the proof and the charge exists and that the court erred in excluding certain evidence.
The first count of the indictment, with which, in view of the fact that defendants were acquitted thereon, we are only incidentally concerned, charged defendants with having knowingly and continuously engaged in an unlawful combination and conspiracy to secure control of a substantial number of the companies which provide public transportation service in various cities, towns and counties of the several states, and to eliminate and exclude all competition in the [**3] sale of motor busses, petroleum products, tires and tubes to such transportation companies then owned or controlled by National City Lines, Inc., or Pacific City Lines, Inc., or of which said companies should acquire control, in the future, all in violation of Section 1 of the Anti-trust Act, 15 U.S.C.A. 1.
The second count charged defendants with having conspired to monopolize part of the interstate trade and commerce of the United States, to wit, that part consisting of the sale of busses, petroleum products, tires and tubes used by local transportation systems in those cities in which defendants National, American and Pacific owned, controlled or had a substantial financial interest in, or had acquired, or in the future should acquire ownership, control or a substantial financial interest in such transportation systems, in violation of Section 2 of the Act.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
186 F.2d 562 *; 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 4052 **; 1951 Trade Cas. (CCH) P62,757
UNITED STATES v. NATIONAL CITY LINES, Inc., et al.
Lines, supplier, contracts, monopolize, busses, conspiracy, products, operating company, indictment, tires, interstate commerce, petroleum product, commerce, customers, sales, tubes, transit system, inconsistency, stock, concerted, conspire, words, manufacturers, practices, acquire, oil, purchasing, financing, supplying, Cab
Antitrust & Trade Law, Monopolies & Monopolization, Attempts to Monopolize, General Overview, Regulated Practices, Conspiracy to Monopolize, Sherman Act, Sherman Act, Scope, Monopolization Offenses, Criminal Law & Procedure, Trials, Verdicts, Inconsistent Verdicts, Civil Procedure, Judgment as Matter of Law, Directed Verdicts, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Appeals, Business & Corporate Compliance, Types of Commercial Transactions, Sales of Goods, Output, Exclusive & Requirements Agreements, Inchoate Crimes, Conspiracy, Elements, Public Contracts Law, Types of Contracts, Requirements Contracts, US Department of Justice Actions, Criminal Actions, Intent, Abuse of Discretion, Evidence, Evidence, Relevance, Preservation of Relevant Evidence, Exclusion & Preservation by Prosecutors, Admissibility, Procedural Matters, Rulings on Evidence