Dee-K Enterprises, Inc. v. Heveafil Sdn. Bhd.
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
299 F.3d 281 (2002)
- Written by Elizabeth Yingling, JD
Facts
Dee-K Enterprises, Inc., and another United States corporation (collectively, Dee-K) (plaintiffs) sued several Indonesian, Thai, and Malaysian companies, including Heveafil Sdn. Bhd., along with several United States subsidiaries (collectively, Heveafil) (defendants) in district court for antitrust violations. Dee-K, which purchased rubber thread from Heveafil, alleged that Heveafil engaged in a conspiracy to fix prices with an intent to affect United States commerce. From 1992 through 1995, Heveafil met regularly in various places in Southeast Asia to discuss and implement price-fixing schemes. During that same time period, Heveafil sold rubber thread for the agreed-upon fixed prices throughout the world. Heveafil sold rubber thread into the United States market by selling directly to U.S. customers, or through a U.S. division or subsidiary. After trial, a jury returned a verdict finding that although Heveafil engaged in a conspiracy to fix prices with the intention to affect United States commerce, the conspiracy did not have a substantial effect on United States commerce. Dee-K appealed, arguing that the substantial-effects test set forth in Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. California was inapplicable because Heveafil’s conduct was not wholly foreign and price-fixed goods were sold directly into the United States. Instead, Dee-K argued that the applicable test was the domestic jurisdictional test enunciated in McLain v. Real Estate Bd. of New Orleans, which only required Dee-K to prove that Heveafil’s activity was “in interstate commerce.” Heveafil countered that the Hartford Fire test applied because the conspiratorial agreements occurred in foreign countries.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Motz, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.