United States v. W.T. Grant Co.

345 U.S. 629 (1953)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
U
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

United States v. W.T. Grant Co.

United States Supreme Court
345 U.S. 629 (1953)

JL
Play video

Facts

Hancock (defendant) was a partner in the investment banking firm Lehman Bros. The practice of Lehman Bros. was to ask for representation on board of directors of companies for which it did financing. Hancock served on the board of directors of six corporations (defendants). Of the six corporations, each competes with one other. W.T. Grant Co. competes with S.H. Kress & Co.; Sears Roebuck & Co. competes with Bond Stores; and Kroger Co. competes with Jewel Tea Co. The United States government (the Government) sued Hancock and the corporations, alleging that the service on these boards of directors violated § 8 of the Clayton Act’s prohibition of interlocking corporate directorates. The Government sought an order to terminate the interlocks and an injunction against future violations of § 8 of the Clayton Act. Prior to the lawsuit, the Government attempted to persuade Hancock through five years of administrative efforts that the service on these boards of directors was illegal. After the lawsuit was filed, Hancock resigned from three of the boards of directors, ending the allegedly improper interlocks. The district court granted summary judgment to Hancock and the corporations because the lawsuit had become moot. The Government petitioned the Supreme Court of the United States for review.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Clark, J.)

Dissent (Douglas, J.)

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 807,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 807,000 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 807,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Remedies

Key Terms

Related Videos