Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Toys “R” Us, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
221 F.3d 928 (2000)


Facts

Toys “R” Us, Inc. (Toys R Us) (defendant) was a major toy retailer responsible for approximately 20 percent of all toy sales in the United States. Beginning in the late 1970s, low-price warehouse clubs began competing with Toys R Us. By the early 1990s, toy manufacturers were looking to reduce their dependence on Toys R Us, and warehouse clubs were steadily increasing their share of the toy-selling market. In 1992, Toys R Us entered a series of individual vertical agreements with toy manufacturers. The manufacturers individually agreed to restrict distribution of toys to warehouse clubs and give Toys R Us preferential treatment. Afterward, the warehouse clubs’ market share shrunk. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (plaintiff) sued Toys R Us, alleging the vertical agreements violated the Sherman Act and § 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The FTC also claimed Toys R Us had facilitated a horizontal boycott, or group refusal to deal, among toy manufacturers. The Toys R Us merchandising president had told some manufacturers that other manufacturers were agreeing to boycott the warehouse clubs. Toys R Us claimed this evidence was insufficient to show that it had facilitated a horizontal conspiracy. Toys R Us also argued the vertical agreements were necessary to protect against the warehouse clubs’ free riding on retail services provided by Toys R Us. The FTC entered an order against Toys R Us, and Toys R Us 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 (Wood, 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.

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 173,000 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.