Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
289 F.2d 835 (1961)


Facts

Anheuser-Busch, Inc. (AB) (defendant) was a national brewing company that competed with local and regional breweries in geographic submarkets. The St. Louis area was one geographic submarket. AB’s beer was generally more expensive than its regional competitors’ beer. In 1953, most United States breweries raised prices to cover national increases in employee wages. In most markets, AB did the same. However, in the St. Louis area, AB and its competitors did not raise prices. AB’s national and St. Louis area sales both declined severely. In response to the St. Louis area decline, AB engaged in vigorous competition with the other St. Louis breweries on price and other factors. AB lowered its price, initiated new advertising campaigns, and updated its operations. AB also attempted product changes and innovations. After these efforts, in March 1955, AB’s St. Louis market share reached a high of 39.3 percent. Soon after, AB and the local breweries raised prices, with AB’s prices ending up higher than the local breweries’ prices again. But the following year, AB’s market share fell back down to 17.5 percent. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (plaintiff) sued AB. During the alleged period, AB’s prices were lower in the St. Louis area than anywhere else. The FTC found that AB’s primary-line price-cutting violated the Robinson-Patman Act. The FTC relied heavily on a finding that, although AB had not used profits from its national business to stabilize its price-cutting losses in the St. Louis market, AB had the ability to do so. The case went up to the United States Supreme Court and was then remanded to the court of appeals.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Schnakenberg, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.