Northeastern Telephone Co. v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
651 F.2d 76 (1981)
- Written by John Reeves, JD
Facts
Northeastern Telephone Co. (Northeastern) (plaintiff) sued both the American Telephone and Telegraph Co. (AT&T) and its affiliate Southern New England Telephone Company (SNET) (defendants). Northeastern alleged that AT&T, acting via SNET, engaged in predatory pricing with regard to its telephone equipment in an attempt to monopolize the market. SNET, unlike Northeastern, sold multiple products. Northeastern urged the district court to adopt a fully-distributed-cost test instead of a marginal- or variable-cost test to determine whether Northeastern fixed prices with the intent to monopolize. Under the fully-distributed-cost test, the evidence showed that SNET was able to subsidize its reduction in the price of telephone equipment with revenue generated in selling other products. The fully-distributed-cost test also showed that as a public utility under the authority of a state regulatory agency, SNET could allocate its joint costs to the parts of its business in which there was no competition. The district court accepted this test and entered judgment in favor of Northeastern. The court found that a fully-distributed-cost analysis would aid single-market competitors such as Northeastern in their competition with multiproduct firms such as SNET. SNET appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kaufman, 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.