United States v. Topco Associates
United States Supreme Court
405 U.S. 596 (1972)
- Written by Nicholas Decoster, JD
Facts
Topco Associates, Inc. (Topco) (defendant), was a cooperative association consisting of roughly 25 regional supermarket chains operating throughout the United States. Topco served as a purchasing agent for the supermarket chains and provided over 1,000 different products to its members. Most of the products were distributed to the members under Topco brands, which proved to be very popular and particularly profitable to Topco members. Membership in Topco had to be approved by a board of directors composed of executives who were existing members, and membership was also conditioned on an affirmative vote of 75 percent by existing members. If an applicant wished to operate within 100 miles of an existing member, the existing member could require the affirmative vote for membership to be 85 percent. The United States (plaintiff) brought a complaint against Topco, alleging that the arrangement violated § 1 of the Sherman Act. Specifically, the government argued that Topco members were engaged in an unlawful scheme to divide up the market for Topco-branded products into exclusive territories for the members. The government also contended that the membership requirements were used as a means to exclude competition. Topco argued that its members needed territorial divisions to effectively compete with larger national chains. The district court held in favor of Topco after applying the rule of reason to the challenged restraint. The government appealed the decision, arguing that the per se rule should have been applied.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Marshall, J.)
Dissent (Burger, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 780,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.