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

Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Federal Trade Commission

United States Supreme Court
440 U.S. 69 (1979)


Facts

In 1965, Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company (A&P) (defendant) wanted to switch from selling name-brand milk to A&P branded milk. A&P solicited an offer from the Borden Company (Borden) to sell milk under the new arrangement. Dissatisfied with Borden’s offer, A&P solicited a lower offer from Bowman Dairy (Bowman). A&P then went back to Borden and leveraged Bowman’s bid to secure an even lower offer from Borden. When Borden made the second bid, A&P led Borden to believe Borden was only matching the bid by Bowman. However, Borden’s second bid was lower than Bowman’s bid. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (plaintiff) sued A&P, arguing A&P violated § 2(f) of the Robinson-Patman Act by knowingly inducing price discrimination from Borden. A&P raised affirmative defenses, including the meeting-competition defense. The meeting-competition defense allows a firm to charge discriminatory prices if the lower price is offered in a good-faith effort to meet the low price of a competitor. The court of appeals rejected A&P’s defenses and affirmed the FTC’s order. In particular, the court of appeals held the meeting-competition defense did not apply, because A&P knew Borden’s offer was lower than Bowman’s offer. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

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 (Stewart, 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.

Concurrence/Dissent (White, J.)

The concurrence/dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the judge’s concurrence in part and dissent in part.

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 222,000 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.