Embodied in this paper are the various case briefs that have been created as exercises in the pursuit of a better understanding of basic principles of law, through the a study of relevant jurisprudence resolved in different State and Federal jurisdictions throughout the United States…
vs. Reeder-Simco GMC, Inc.,1 Kelo vs. City of New London,2 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. vs. Samara Brothers, Inc.,3 Anderson vs. City of LaVergne,4 Dearborn vs. Real Estate Agency,5 Rhudy vs. Bottlecaps, Inc.,6 and Kain v. Bluemound East Industrial Park, Inc.,7
Reeder-Simco is a business entity that acts as a Volvo dealer in Fort Smith, Arkansas. In February of 2000, it filed suit against Volvo on the allegation that that its (Reeder's) sales and profits declined due to Volvo's price discrimination practices.
Reeder-Simco alleges that Volvo offered to other dealers price concessions that were significantly more favorable that those given to Reeder-Simco. Thus, it filed suit against Volvo for allegedly violating the Robinson-Patman Act (RPA), which prohibits forms of discriminatory pricing that reduce competition.
On this basis, Reeder explained that its business is conducted in the following manner: retail customers take bids from dealers who solicit price concessions from the manufacturers. These concessions are factored into dealer's bids. Reeder accuses Volvo of offering better price concessions to other Volvo dealers bidding for different customers, directly resulting in Reeder suffering losses.
The District Court District Court allowe...
The District Court District Court allowed the case to go to a jury, who held in favor of Reeder and awarded damages. Volvo appealed the decision, arguing a lack of competition was present, which is required by the RPA to apply. Volvo substantiated its contention stating that Reeder was not actually bidding against the Volvo dealers who supposedly were given favorable concessions. The appellate court dismissed the appeal, ruling that even though Volvo dealers do not actually bid against each other, they effectively competed at the same functional level, which would render the RPA applicable. Thus, Volvo brought the case to the Supreme Court on certiorari.
Whether or not a manufacturer offering its dealers different wholesale prices may be held liable for price discrimination proscribed by Robinson-Patman Act in the absence of a showing that the manufacturer discriminated between dealers contemporaneously competing to resell to the same retail customer.
For the reasons stated, the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
The Robinson-Patman Act does not reach the case Reeder presents, because the Act addresses price discrimination in cases involving competition between different purchasers for resale of the purchased product, whereas competition of that character is not involved when a product subject to special order is sold through a customer-specific competitive bidding process. It does not "ban all price differences charged to different purchasers of commodities of like grade and quality", but ...
Cite this document
(“Portfolio of Seven Case Briefs on Different Business Law Topics Essay”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/299649-portfolio-of-seven-case-briefs-on-different-business-law-topics
(Portfolio of Seven Case Briefs on Different Business Law Topics Essay)
“Portfolio of Seven Case Briefs on Different Business Law Topics Essay”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/299649-portfolio-of-seven-case-briefs-on-different-business-law-topics.
However, in most of the cases, the complaints are made and registered against stepfathers and husbands committing family violence upon the stepchildren and wives respectively. The reasons behind the stepchildren and wives for becoming the victim of such violent behavior and antagonism includes their being physically and financially weak, which stops them from defending themselves as well as from taking revenge from the strong member of the family.
B says yes. At that point, the sale between A and B has been perfected because the parties by then have intended or agreed to have the goods transferred to the buyer.4 B becomes the owner of the Austin car and he is now under obligation to pay to A the ten thousand pounds, the amount of the cause or consideration or the selling price of the chattel.
Mr. Taitts is said to be suffering physical disability and it is inopportune that upon their return to their seats which was down the roe from Ms. Gilson, Mr. Taitts lost his balance and thereafter fell into Ms. Gilson, who in turn fell down the stairs and as a result, she obtained injuries on her body.
The selection of this issue was predicated on its significance to both business and ethics, on the one hand, and its somewhat controversial nature on the other. From the business perspective, the issue is important because the absence
The plaintiff Mr. Tompkins, a citizen of Pennsylvania, complained in a Southern New York Federal court. His complain was that he had been injured by a passing train, while he was on his way home, after being dropped by his friend at
The case started at the district court where the plaintiff was granted the go-ahead with the case. After several months of court sessions, the district court gave the defendants a friendly judgment. Immediately, the plaintiff appealed the
Case 1: Wollery Delgado, plaintiff and appellant v. Trax Bar& grill defendant and appellant. History: The trial court had awarded compensations to the plaintiff for the physical injuries that were sustained from an attack by a mob on the premises of the defendant. The appeal court reversed this ruling.
5 Pages(1250 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Portfolio of Seven Case Briefs on Different Business Law Topics for FREE!