Clayton Antitrust Act


Also found in: Legal, Financial, Wikipedia.

Clayton Antitrust Act,

1914, passed by the U.S. Congress as an amendment to clarify and supplement the Sherman Antitrust ActSherman Antitrust Act,
1890, first measure passed by the U.S. Congress to prohibit trusts; it was named for Senator John Sherman. Prior to its enactment, various states had passed similar laws, but they were limited to intrastate businesses.
..... Click the link for more information.
 of 1890. It was drafted by Henry De Lamar Clayton. The act prohibited exclusive sales contracts, local price cutting to freeze out competitors, rebates, interlocking directorates in corporations capitalized at $1 million or more in the same field of business, and intercorporate stock holdings. Labor unions and agricultural cooperatives were excluded from the forbidden combinations in the restraint of trade. The act restricted the use of the injunctioninjunction,
in law, order of a court directing a party to perform a certain act or to refrain from an act or acts. The injunction, which developed as the main remedy in equity, is used especially where money damages would not satisfy a plaintiff's claim, or to protect personal
..... Click the link for more information.
 against labor, and it legalized peaceful strikes, picketing, and boycotts. It declared that "the labor of a human being is not a commodity or article of commerce." Organized labor was as heartened by the act as it had been dejected by the doctrine of the Danbury Hatters' CaseDanbury Hatters' Case,
decided in 1908 by the U.S. Supreme Court. In 1902 the hatters' union instituted a nationwide boycott of the products of a nonunion hat manufacturer in Danbury, Conn.
..... Click the link for more information.
, but subsequent judicial construction weakened the act's labor provisions. The Clayton Antitrust Act was the basis for a great many important and much-publicized suits against large corporations. Later amendments to the act strengthened its provisions against unfair price cutting (1936) and intercorporate stock holdings (1950).
The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia™ Copyright © 2013, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Columbia University Press. All rights reserved. www.cc.columbia.edu/cu/cup/
References in periodicals archive ?
The Clayton Antitrust Act was enacted in 1914 to prevent anticompetitive acts.
The DOJ is focusing on the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914 while the FCC delves into the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
Consumer welfare was never part of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 or the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914.
Such legislation included the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921, and the Robinson-Patman Act of 1936.
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has published a Statement of Enforcement Principles Regarding "Unfair Methods of Competition applicable under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act." The statement describes the underlying antitrust principles that guide FTC's application of its statutory authority over unfair methods of competition --even if these methods are not necessarily prohibited under the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 or the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914.
(9) In reviewing past proposals, the Board has also considered whether the banking organizations became affiliated prior to 1950, when the Clayton Antitrust Act was first extended to bank mergers.
20544), Carola Frydman and Eric Hilt provide empirical evidence of the extent to which financial relationships help or hurt companies by analyzing the effects of a provision of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914.
15, 1914, the Clayton Antitrust Act, which expanded on the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, was signed into law by President Woodrow Wilson.
Wilson continued the drive toward greater federal regulation of economic activity with the signing of the Clayton Antitrust Act and legislation to create the Federal Trade Commission.
14580 is to amend the federal anti-merger law, Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act ...
Part III identifies tolling doctrines that courts can use to solve the problems associated with the discovery accrual rule and proposes a new tolling rule for RICO taken from the Clayton Antitrust Act. The Conclusion summarizes how taking into account all three aspects of the RICO statute of limitations leads to a complete and coherent timeliness rule that is fair to plaintiffs and defendants alike.