Reiter v. Sonotone Corp.
United States Supreme Court
442 U.S. 330 (1979)
Reiter (plaintiff) brought a suit on behalf of a class of plaintiffs who had purchased hearing aids from Sonotone Corporation and five other manufacturers (Sonotone) (defendants). Reiter claimed that Sonotone had violated antitrust law by engaging in horizontal and vertical price-fixing schemes. Reiter also claimed that, as a result of Sonotone’s antitrust violations, Reiter and the rest of the class had overpaid for hearing aids at retail locations, because the prices were unlawfully fixed at higher amounts than the prices should have been. Reiter sought treble damages under § 4 of the Clayton Act. At the district court, Sonotone made a motion to dismiss Reiter’s § 4 claim, arguing that Reiter lacked standing to bring the claim because Reiter’s claimed injuries were not encompassed by § 4.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Burger, C.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 174,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.