A Concise History of United States Resale Price Maintenance Arrangements and its Current Status under State and Federal Laws
Abstract
Resale price maintenance (RPM), a form of vertical price fixing is the practice whereby manufacturers of brand-name or trademark goods stipulate and attempt to enforce minimum, maximum, or actual wholesale and retail prices of such goods as they progress through the distribution chain to the final consumers of said products.
References
[2] Aladdins Lights, Inc. v. Eye Lighting Int’l. 2017 Ohio 722, Ohio Court of Appeals Ninth Appellate District, Summit County.
[3] Albrecht v. Herald Co., 390 U. S. 145. 1968.
[4] Beach v. Viking Sewing Machine Co. 784 F. 2d 746, 749-52. 6th Circuit. 1986.
[5] Beer Wholesalers v. Miller Brewing Co., 426 N. W. 2d 438, 443. Minn. Ct. App. 1988.
[6] Bissell Carpet Sweeper Co. v. Masters Mail Order of Washington, D.C., Inc. 240 F. 2d 684. 1957.
[7] Blanton Enterprises, Inc. v. Burger King, 680 F. Supp. 753. D.S.C. 1988.
[8] Bostick Oil Co. v. Michelin Tire Corporation, 702 F. 2d 1207. 4th Circuit. 1983.
[9] California v. Bioelements, Inc. Case No 10011659. Cal. Super. Ct. 2011.
[10] California v. Derma Quest, Inc. No. RG10497526. Cal. Super. Ct. February 23, 2010.
[11] Cartwright Act, Col. Bus. And Prof. Code, Sections 16700-16770. 1907.
[12] Chavez v. Whirlpool, 93 Cal., App. 4th 363. Cal. Ct. App. 2001.
[13] Connecticut Antitrust Act, Conn. Gen. Stat., Section 35-24 to 35-49.
[14] Continental TV, Inc. v. GTE Sylvania, Inc. 433 U. S. 36. 1977.
[15] Dalton v. Miles Labs, 282 S. W. 2d. Mo. banc 1955.
[16] Darush v. Revision LP 2013 U. S. Dist. Lexus 60084 at 17. C.D. Cal. April 10, 2013.
[17] Dickerson v. United States, 530 U. S. 428. 2000.
[18] Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park and Sons, 220 U. S. 373. 1911.
[19] Erie County, Ohio v. Morton Salt, Inc., 702 F. 3d 860, 869. 6th Circuit. 2012.
[20] General Electric Company v. Masters Mail Order Company, 244 F. 2d 681. 1957.
[21] Greco, A.J. 1983. Decline and Fall of the Fair Trade Law. Louisiana Business Review, Vol. 47, No. 1, Spring 1983.
[22] Greco, A.J. 1983. The Retail Dealers’ Agreement Act: An Unwise Backward Vertical Restraint. Enterprise, Vol. Two, Number Three, Spring 1983.
[23] In re Compact Disc, Minimum Advertised Price Litigation, 216 F.R.D 197. D. Me. 2003.
[24] Kolling v. Dow Jones and Co., 137 Cal. App. 3d 709. Cal. App.1982.
[25] Mailand v. Burckle, 572 p. 2d 1142, 1148. Cal.1978.
[26] Manuel v. State, 982 So. 2d 316. La. Ct. Appl. 2008.
[27] Maryland Antitrust Act, Md. Code Ann., Comm. Law Sections 11-201 to 11-213, as amended and codified at Md. Code Ann., Com. Law Section 11-204(b). effective Oct 1, 2009.
[28] Maschari v. Vernors, Inc. No. 13-82-36, 1983 (Ohio App. Lexis 12981). Ohio Ct. App. 1983.
[29] McCall Co. v. O’Neil, 17 Ohio N. P. (n. s.) 17. Ohio Com. Pl. 1914.
[30] McGuire-Keogh Fair Trade Enabling Act, Stat 632 U. S. C. A. Section 45. Supp. 1952.
[31] Miller v. W. H. Bristow, Inc. 739 F. Supp. 1044. D.S.C. 1990.
[32] Miller-Tydings Resale Price Maintenance, Pub. L. 314, Ch. 690, Title III, 50 Stat. 693.
[33] Missouri Antitrust Law, Mo. Rev. Stat., Sections 416.011 to 416.16.
[34] Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corp., 465 U. S. 752. 1984.
[35] Montana Unfair Trade Practices, Mont. Code Ann., Sections 30-14-201 to 30-14-226.
[36] Multistate Amici Curiae Brief, in the U. S. Supreme Court, Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc. dba Kay’s Kloset… Kay’s Shoes.
[37] Murphy, M.R., Nickerson, M.T., Finnerty, C.S., Broadsky, J.S. 2019. Unilateral Policies are 99 years Old and Still the Safest and Most Effective Form of Resale Price Maintenance, Publications, K and L Gates LLP, June 3,
[38] N. Kansas City Hosp. Bd. Of Trs. v. St. Luke’s Northland Hosp., 984 S. W. 2d 113, 120. Mo. Ct. App. 1998.
[39] NAAG State Antitrust Database, http://naag.org/antitrust/search.
[40] Navien America, Inc. v. Allen, 2011 WL 3925729 at *3. Conn. Super. Ct. 2011.
[41] New Hampshire Antitrust Provisions, N. H. Rev. Stat. Ann. Sections 356-1 to 356-14.
[42] New York v. Salton, Inc., 265 F. Supp. 2d 310. S.D.N.Y. 2003.
[43] New York v. Tempur-Pedic Int’l, No. 0400837. N.Y. Sup. Ct. March 29, 2010.
[44] O’Brien v. Creative Leather Products, Inc. 277 P. 3d 1062. Kan. 2012.
[45] Ohio Valentine Act, Ohio Rev. Code, ch. 1331, Sections 1331.01 to 1331.99.
[46] Old Dearborn Distributing Company v. Seagram Distillers Corporation, 299 U. S. 183. 1936.
[47] Planned Parenthood v. Casey 505 U. S. 833. 1992.
[48] Press Release, Cal. Att’y. Gen., Attorney General Halts Online Cosmetics Price-Fixing Scheme. Jan. 14, 2011.
[49] Proposed Model Federal Antitrust Legislation of the Nat’l. Assn. of Attorneys General, 7 Trade Reg. Rep.
[50] Rogers-Kent Inc. v. Gen. Elec. Co., 99 S. E. 2d 665, 672. S.C. 1957.
[51] Schwegmann Bros. v. Eli Lilly and Company, 205 F. 2d. 788-798. 1952.
[52] Settlement Agreement, New York v. Salton Inc., No. O2~CV-7096.S.D.N.Y. Sept 5, 2002.
[53] Simpson v. Union Oil Co., 337 U. S. 13. 1964.
[54] South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act, S. C. Code Ann., Sections 39-5-10 to 39-5-560.
[55] Sports and Travel Mktg. v. Chicago Cutlery Co., 811 F. Supp. 1372, 1384. D. Minn. 1993.
[56] State Antitrust Enforcement Handbook, Section of Antitrust Law, ABA, Third Edition. 2018.
[57] State Antitrust Practices and Statutes, (Fifth), Vol. I, II, III, Section of Antitrust Law, ABA. 2014.
[58] State of Maryland v. Johnson and Johnson Vision Care, No. 03-C-16-002271. Baltimore Cnty. Cir. Ct. Feb. 29, 2016.
[59] State Oil v. Kahn, 522 U.S. 3. 1997.
[60] Sunbeam Corporation v. Wentling, 185 F. 2d 903 (1950) and 192 F. 2d 7. 1951.
[61] Temperato v. Horstman, 321 S. W. 2d 657, 662-63. Mo. 1959.
[62] Trane U. S. Inc., v. Meehan, 563 F. Supp. 2d 743, 749 M. 4, 758. N. D. Ohio 2008.
[63] United States v. Colgate and Company, 250 U. S. 300. 1919.
[64] United States v. General Electric Company, 272 U.S. 476. 1926.
[65] United States v. McKesson and Robbins, Inc. U.S. 305. 1956.
[66] United States v. Parke Davis and Co., 362 U.S. 29. 1960.
[67] W. T. Rawleigh Medical Co. v. Walker, 77 So. 70. Ala. Ct. App. 1917.
[68] World Home Center.com, Inc., v. PAC Lighting, Inc., 851 F. Supp. 2d 494. S. D. N. Y. July 5, 2011.
The Copyright Transfer Form to ASERS Publishing (The Publisher)
This form refers to the manuscript, which an author(s) was accepted for publication and was signed by all the authors.
The undersigned Author(s) of the above-mentioned Paper here transfer any and all copyright-rights in and to The Paper to The Publisher. The Author(s) warrants that The Paper is based on their original work and that the undersigned has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment. It is the author's responsibility to obtain written permission to quote material that has been previously published in any form. The Publisher recognizes the retained rights noted below and grants to the above authors and employers for whom the work performed royalty-free permission to reuse their materials below. Authors may reuse all or portions of the above Paper in other works, excepting the publication of the paper in the same form. Authors may reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the above Paper for the Author's personal use or for internal company use, provided that the source and The Publisher copyright notice are mentioned, that the copies are not used in any way that implies The Publisher endorsement of a product or service of an employer, and that the copies are not offered for sale as such. Authors are permitted to grant third party requests for reprinting, republishing or other types of reuse. The Authors may make limited distribution of all or portions of the above Paper prior to publication if they inform The Publisher of the nature and extent of such limited distribution prior there to. Authors retain all proprietary rights in any process, procedure, or article of manufacture described in The Paper. This agreement becomes null and void if and only if the above paper is not accepted and published by The Publisher, or is with drawn by the author(s) before acceptance by the Publisher.