SmartBrief
Confirm favorite deletion?
Antitrust Keyed to Gavil, 5th Ed.
Conwood Co. v. United States Tobacco Co.
Citation:
290 F.3d 768 (2002)Facts
The moist snuff market consisted of only four competitors, with USTC controlling approximately 77% of the market. Conwood, the second-largest competitor, held about 13.5% market share. In the moist snuff industry, in-store point-of-sale advertising and product visibility are critical to success due to restrictions on tobacco advertising. Beginning around 1990, USTC perceived Conwood as a competitive threat and implemented strategies to exclude it from the market.
Evidence showed that USTC sales representatives systematically removed and destroyed Conwood’s display racks without retailer permission, often hiding Conwood’s products in USTC racks where they would be less visible to consumers. USTC representatives were trained to take advantage of inattentive store clerks to remove competitors’ displays. Conwood spent approximately $100,000 per month replacing destroyed racks, and sales representatives spent up to 50% of their time repairing or replacing damaged displays.
USTC also used its position as category manager for retailers to provide misleading sales data, recommending that retailers reduce or eliminate competitors’ products while maintaining USTC’s slower-moving items. USTC implemented exclusive agreements with retailers and a Consumer Alliance Program (CAP) that provided incentives for retailers to give preferential treatment to USTC products.
During the 1990s, Conwood’s market share growth slowed significantly compared to its growth in the previous decade. In areas where USTC did not have rack exclusivity, Conwood’s market share was well above its national average. Expert testimony established that USTC’s conduct led to higher prices and reduced consumer choice in the moist snuff market.
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
Topic:
Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.Parties:
Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.Procedural Posture & History:
Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.:
A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises:
Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
Brief Facts:
A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.Rule of Law:
Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.Facts:
What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case.Issue(s):
Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.Holding:
Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.Concurring / Dissenting Opinions:
Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.Reasoning and Analysis:
Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
Policy:
Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.Court Direction:
Shares where the Court went from here for this case.