Weekley v. Rhett

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a plaintiff in a vertical price-fixing case must produce evidence which “tends to exclude the possibility of independent action”
• reaffirming rule that vertical price restraints are per se illegal while non-price restrictions are subject to the rule of reason
• collecting sources supporting proposition that \the economic effect of resale price maintenance is little different from agreements on nonprice restrictions\
• to survive summary judgment there must be evidence that \reasonably tends to prove\ plaintiff's theory
• “[T]here must be evidence that tends to exclude the possibility of independent [pro-competitive] action by the manufacturer and distributor.”
• supplier and its distributor conspired to maintain resale prices and terminate price cutters in violation of section one

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).