Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Comm’n
v. NFL (Raiders I) case brief summary
726 F.2d 1381 (1984)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendants,
football league, member clubs, and interested parties, appealed a
decision of the United States District Court for the Central District
of California permanently enjoining defendants, on anti-trust
grounds, from interfering with the transfer of plaintiff owner's
football franchise to plaintiff commission's stadium.
CASE FACTS
The
commission sued the football league and the member clubs alleging
that the league's constitution contained a rule restraining trade in
violation of § 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C.S. §
1. The rule, which required three-quarters approval by the members
before any single member could move into another's home territory,
prevented the owner's football franchise from moving to the
commission's stadium. After the jury returned a verdict against
defendants, the trial court permanently enjoined defendants from
interfering with the move.
DISCUSSION
The court affirmed, rejecting arguments that the league was a single entity incapable of conspiring to restrain trade, because the members were sufficiently independent and competitive with one another to warrant rule of reason scrutiny. Further, the jury could have determined from the evidence that the rule harmed competition among the members to such an extent that any benefits to the league as a whole were outweighed.
DISCUSSION
The court affirmed, rejecting arguments that the league was a single entity incapable of conspiring to restrain trade, because the members were sufficiently independent and competitive with one another to warrant rule of reason scrutiny. Further, the jury could have determined from the evidence that the rule harmed competition among the members to such an extent that any benefits to the league as a whole were outweighed.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed because the member
clubs were sufficiently independent and competitive with one another
to warrant rule of reason scrutiny, and the jury could have
determined from the evidence that the rule harmed competition among
the member clubs to such an extent that any benefits to the football
league were outweighed.
No comments:
Post a Comment