1. Assume that the state of Ohio passed a hazardous waste statute, seeking to protect the general public and workers. The state statute did not violate the Commerce Clause because it imposed no restriction on interstate commerce. Both the state statute and the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) established job safety standards and specified worker training and employer licensing, but the requirements differed. Which statute(s) Ohio corporations had to obey? Pick the best ANALYSISwer.
There are different types of businesses, for example, some use monopolies, trust and pools, while other eliminate competition for higher prices. As stated in “Progressive reformers regarded regulation as a cure for all sorts of socioeconomic and political problems” , “The Sherman Act of 1890 attempted to outlaw the restriction of competition by large companies that co-operated with rivals to fix outputs, prices, and market shares, initially through pools and later through trusts” , meaning, competition is the
1. Give an example of a case that would fall under diversity jurisdiction. Explain all of the key elements of such a case.
United States antitrust law is a collection of federal and state government laws, which regulates the conduct and organization of business corporations, generally to promote fair competition for the benefit of consumers. The four major pieces of legislation known as the Antitrust Laws include: The Sherman Act, The Clayton Antitrust Act, The Federal Trade Commission, and the Celler-Kefauver Act.
The antitrust laws are the basis of this national policy. These laws, enforced by both the federal and state governments, require companies to compete in the marketplace. The Sherman Act, the first federal "antitrust law," was enacted in 1890, at a time when there was enormous concern about "trusts" -- combinations of companies that were able to control entire industries. Since then, other laws have been enacted to supplement the Sherman Act, including the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Clayton Act (1914). With some revisions, these laws still are in effect today. They have the same basic objective: making sure there are strong economic incentives for businesses to operate efficiently, keep prices down, and keep quality up.
case brief---Gregory, a comedy writer, entered into a contract with Wessel, a comedian. The contract provided that Gregory would provide Wessel with a 15 minute monologue for his upcoming appearance on the comedy hour and Wessel will pay $250 to Gregory. All performers could make $500 per appearance on the comedy hour. and when Wessel was scheduled to aper on the comedy hour, Gregory informed him that he was unable to provide the monologue, because last time Wessel was asked to make special guest appearances at three local comedy clubs performance during the comedy hour. and Wessel bought lawsuit to Gregory for beach of contract and request damages of $1250.
3. For a crime to be committed, the prosecutor must be able to prove a criminal intent and an overt act to carry out that intent. Jack and Mary agreed to rob a series of banks. Prior to beginning their bank robbery spree, they were arrested and charged with criminal conspiracy. What act did Jack and Mary do that justifies a finding that they committed the crime? Explain.
The people were unhappy with the corruption of these businesses and pressured the government to take action against them. The Sherman Act, had a very small effect on the monopolies due to its loose enforcement and was followed by the enactment of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Clayton Act. The Federal Trade Commission Act did not allow for unlawful practice and unlawful competition between businesses, but allowed to enforce stricter laws and policies that the Sherman Act did not have power over. The Clayton Act did not allow businesses to form together to reduce competition and initiate a large monopoly to form. These acts helped to dissolve and weaken monopolies and were continuously amended to strengthen
In the case of Anthony, a New Jersey resident and owner of a waste disposal company in the state of New Jersey, and his two business associates, Paul and Silvio, whom suffered severe injuries due to a motor vehicle accident caused by a negligent truck driver; they have great standing to sue against the neglectful driver and the company associated with the ownership of the vehicle. Regardless of the diversity of their residency/ citizenship, the affected party can proceed to sue the corporation responsible for the damages caused by their staff and property; reason being that they are protected under the Constitution’s diversity of citizenship, and the privileges and immunities clause. Furthermore, these two constitutional clauses in addition to the commerce clause, dictate the court that the matter needs to be brought to.
The Justice Department and the states contend that Microsoft is violating the Sherman Antitrust Act, which was passed by Congress in 1890. The act has two sections. Section I prohibits certain types of agreements that restrict the flow of trade. Section II prohibits the misuse of monopoly power, namely anti-competitive actions that seek to maintain that monopoly power and actions that attempt to use that monopoly power to dominate another market (2).
Antitrust law in the United States is a collection of federal and state government laws regulating the conduct and organization of business corporations with the intent to promote fair competition in an open-market economy for the benefit of the public. Congress passed the first antitrust statute, the Sherman Antitrust Act, in 1890 in response to the public outrage toward big business. In 1914, Congress passed two additional antitrust laws: the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Clayton Act. (The Antitrust Laws. Web.)
The Sherman Antitrust Act was enacted on July 2nd, 1890 which prohibits activities that restrict interstate commerce and competition in the marketplace.
Please answer the questions posed at the end of each case study in essay form. Each essay will be judged on your capacity to present strong, logical discussions that support your conclusions.