Gunter Harz Sports v. USTA
United States District Court for the District of Nebraska
511 F.Supp. 1103 (1981)
The U.S. Tennis Association (USTA) (defendant), which ran several lucrative tennis tournaments including the U.S. Open in New York, adopted an equipment rule issued by the International Tennis Federation (ITF) whereby it banned a special tennis racket manufactured by German company, Gunter Harz Sports (Gunter Harz) (plaintiff). The racket, called the “spaghetti racket” had two layers of vertical strings, one on each side of the horizontal strings. The effect of the “double-stringing” was to produce a very heavy topspin, giving less skilled players an undue advantage. The ITF stated that the “spirit of the rule is to prevent undue spin on the ball that would result in a change in the character of the game.” Gunter Harz brought an antitrust suit against the USTA in district court.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Pierce, J.)
What to do next…
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.
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 170,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.