Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc.

United States Supreme Court
504 U.S. 451 (1992)


Facts

Eastman Kodak Company (Kodak) (defendant) manufactures and sells photocopiers and micrographic film equipment. Kodak also sells parts and provides services for its equipment. Kodak manufactures some equipment parts internally, while the remaining parts are ordered from independent original-equipment manufacturers (OEMs). There is no cross-compatibility of parts between Kodak’s equipment and its competitors’ equipment. In the 1980s, independent service organizations (ISOs) began selling parts for Kodak equipment and offering repair and maintenance services at much lower prices than Kodak. In response, Kodak began refusing to sell replacement parts to buyers who used ISOs for servicing Kodak equipment and also made it more difficult to obtain used Kodak equipment. Kodak also reached agreements with OEMs that prohibited the sale of equipment parts to anyone other than Kodak. As a result, many ISOs went out of business or lost significant revenue. Image Technical Services, Inc. (ITS) (plaintiff), representing a class of ISOs, brought a suit against Kodak for violating the Sherman Act. The district court granted Kodak’s motion for summary judgment, but the court of appeals reversed. Kodak appealed.

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 (Blackmun, 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.

Dissent (Scalia, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

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 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.