Redwing Carriers, Inc., a Florida Corporation v. McKenzie Tank Lines, Inc., a Florida Corporation
REDWING CARRIERS, INC., a Florida Corporation, Et Al., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. McKENZIE TANK LINES, INC., a Florida Corporation, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
Opinion
PER CURIAM:
We affirm on the basis of the district court’s opinion, reported at 443 F.Supp. 639 (N.D.Fla., 1977), plus the following two points. This court’s decision in Northwest Power Products, Inc. v. Omark Industries, 576 F.2d 83, 90 (CA5, 1978), confirms the district court’s rejection of the Pick-Barth per se rule.
Albert Pick-Barth Co. v. Mitchell Woodbury Corp., 57 F.2d 96 (CA1), cert. denied, 286 U.S. 552 , 52 S.Ct. 503 , 76 L.Ed. 1288 (1932). Second, at oral argument, appellant contended that it produced sufficient evidence of a rule of reason theory to withstand summary judgment. We disagree. At the time McKenzie Tank Lines began hauling molten sulphur in 1976, Redwing had 100% of the relevant market. The fact that McKenzie had ICC and state certificates to haul molten sulphur prior to 1976 does not change the fact that Redwing controlled 100% of the market. Assuming McKenzie was a competitor before the alleged conspiracy began, Redwing is still not able to prove an injury to competition. Pri- or to the alleged conspiracy there were two haulers with the necessary certificates, one with 100% of the business and the other with only the certificates. Assuming further that McKenzie succeeded in eliminating Redwing, the market structure would remain the same, one hauler with 100% of the business and the other with only the certificates. • AFFIRMED.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(no antitrust injury when challenged conduct simply transferred monopoly power from one entity to another)
-
(affirming 443 F.Supp. 639 (N.D.Fla.1977))
Cited by 7 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- L.A. Draper & Son v. Wheelabrator-Frye, Inc., a Corporation Hessco Industrial Supply, Inc., a Corporation Fred Z. Hester, an Individual
- Mid-Texas Communications Systems, Inc. v. American Telephone and Telegraph Company, Southwestern Bell Telephone Company
- Associated Radio Service Company, Associated Radio Company v. Page Airways, Inc.
- Manufacturing Research Corporation, a Florida Corporation -Cross v. Greenlee Tool Company, a Corporation -Cross
- Consol. Gas Co. of Fla. v. City Gas Co. of Fla.
- Juneau Square Corp. v. First Wisconsin National Bank
Most recent
- TRISTAR PRODUCTS INC v. TELEBRANDS CORPORATION
- Consol. Gas Co. of Fla. v. City Gas Co. of Fla.
- L.A. Draper & Son v. Wheelabrator-Frye, Inc., a Corporation Hessco Industrial Supply, Inc., a Corporation Fred Z. Hester, an Individual
- Manufacturing Research Corporation, a Florida Corporation -Cross v. Greenlee Tool Company, a Corporation -Cross
- Associated Radio Service Company, Associated Radio Company v. Page Airways, Inc.
- Mid-Texas Communications Systems, Inc. v. American Telephone and Telegraph Company, Southwestern Bell Telephone Company
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.