Considering your answers to #27, why do some economic historians think the Court's actions may have actually encouraged firms to merge? The Sherman act also did not stop growth of firms by purchase of property which led to mergers. US vs. Addyston Pipe and Steel – companies were working together as a merger to control the industry but were in “reasonable” restraint of trade so they did not violate the Sherman act. The court ruled that collusive agreements among competing firms were illegal but certain mergers in reasonable restraint of trade were allowed. US vs. US Steel – judge found that the corporation possessed neither the power nor intent to exert monopoly power even though it controlled over 50% of the industries output. The merger was acceptable because they showed no predatory practices. Describe enforcement of the Sherman Antitrust Act during Theodore Roosevelt’s administration. Explain the Court’s reasoning in U.S. v. American Tobacco Co. and U.S. v. Standard Oil Co.
This is the end of the preview. Sign up
access the rest of the document.
This note was uploaded on 09/13/2011 for the course ECON 2200 taught by Professor Moore during the Fall '07 term at UGA.