From our private database of 35,800+ case briefs...
United States v. Basic Construction Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
711 F.2d 570 (1983)
Facts
Basic Construction Company (Basic), Henry S. Branscome, Inc. (Branscome, Inc.) and Henry Branscome (defendants) were charged with conspiracy to rig the bidding process for state road-paving contracts in violation of the Sherman Act. The evidence presented by Basic showed that low-ranked officials of the corporation had engaged in bid rigging without the knowledge of its high-level officers and that corporate policy firmly prohibited bid rigging. The district court instructed the jury that it could consider the corporate policy forbidding bid rigging to determine whether the employees acted for the benefit of the corporation. The jury found Basic, Branscome, Inc., and Branscome guilty. Basic and Branscome appealed, arguing that the district court should have instructed the jury to consider Basic’s corporate policy prohibiting bid rigging to determine whether the corporation had the requisite intent to violate the Sherman Act.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 620,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,800 briefs, keyed to 984 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.
