Connection lost
Server error
AMERICAN BANANA CO. v. UNITED FRUIT CO. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A U.S. company sued a competitor under the Sherman Act for monopolistic acts committed in Central America. The Supreme Court held that U.S. law does not apply to conduct occurring within a foreign sovereign’s territory, especially when the injury results from official acts of that foreign government.
Legal Significance: This case established the strong presumption against the extraterritorial application of U.S. statutes and articulated an early, robust version of the act of state doctrine, which bars U.S. courts from judging the validity of a foreign government’s sovereign acts committed within its own territory.
AMERICAN BANANA CO. v. UNITED FRUIT CO. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff, American Banana Co., alleged that Defendant, United Fruit Co., had monopolized the banana trade. Plaintiff purchased a banana plantation and began constructing a railway in Panama. Plaintiff alleged that United Fruit, seeking to eliminate competition, instigated the government of Costa Rica to interfere. Subsequently, Costa Rican soldiers seized a portion of Plaintiff’s plantation, railway, and supplies. An ex parte proceeding in a Costa Rican court then declared the plantation belonged to an agent of United Fruit. Plaintiff claimed these actions, orchestrated by United Fruit, destroyed its business and violated the Sherman Antitrust Act. All the alleged harmful acts, including the seizure of property and disruption of business, occurred outside the United States, primarily in Panama and Costa Rica. The lower courts dismissed the complaint for failure to state a cause of action.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the Sherman Antitrust Act apply extraterritorially to hold a U.S. corporation liable for acts committed in a foreign country, particularly when those acts involved the direct intervention and sovereign authority of the foreign government?
No. The Sherman Act does not apply to the defendant’s conduct because Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit e
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the Sherman Antitrust Act apply extraterritorially to hold a U.S. corporation liable for acts committed in a foreign country, particularly when those acts involved the direct intervention and sovereign authority of the foreign government?
Conclusion
This case established foundational principles of U.S. foreign relations law. While later Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequa
Legal Rule
Legislation is presumed to be territorial in its application and does not Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit ess
Legal Analysis
Justice Holmes, writing for the Court, based the decision on two fundamental Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- U.S. statutes, including the Sherman Act, are presumed to be territorial
