Unformatted text preview: competition, etc.). If Fairto-Middlin shows that the justifications outweigh the harm to competition caused by the agreement, Fairto-Middlin will not be held to have violated Sherman Act Section 1. 23. The direct injury rule is the biggest obstacle to Attired's winning the case. It is an obstacle she cannot clear. Attired does not have standing to bring an antitrust action against the concrete block manufacturers, because she did not suffer direct injury as a result of their unlawful acts. Her injury (having to pay a higher price to the construction contractor) was only an indirect injury. The parties suffering direct injury were the building supply stores that purchased the blocks at the artificially high price. Answers to Student Study Guide and Workbook Questions 82...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 04/30/2010 for the course BUSLAW 301 taught by Professor Abu during the Spring '09 term at Abu Dhabi University.
- Spring '09