Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States (1911)

Read a random definition: confederacy clause

A quick definition of Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States (1911):

Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States (1911) was a court case where the U.S. Supreme Court found that Standard Oil Company, a big oil company, broke the law by doing things that made it hard for other companies to compete with them. This is called a monopoly. The court ordered that the company be split up into smaller parts. The company was owned by the Rockefeller family, who controlled almost all of the oil market in the U.S. The court said that this was not fair to other companies and people who needed oil. The court also said that the government has the power to make laws to stop companies from doing things that hurt competition.

A more thorough explanation:

Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States (1911) was a case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. The case found that Standard Oil Company, a major oil conglomerate in the early 20th century, violated the Sherman Antitrust Act through anticompetitive actions, specifically forming a monopoly. The court ordered that the company be geographically split.

The Standard Oil Company of New Jersey was a holding company owned by the Rockefeller family. The family organized their oil empire by creating holding companies in many of the jurisdictions in which they operated. In total, the Rockefeller family and their holding companies controlled almost the entire petroleum market in the U.S. To further their control over the petroleum market, the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey had acquired nearly all of the oil refining companies in the United States.

The United States brought suit against the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, alleging that it violated the Sherman Antitrust Act because its acquisitions were an undue restraint of trade. The Court ruled that Congress had the power to pass the Sherman Antitrust Act under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. It then ruled that “restraint of trade” included monopolistic behavior, and only unduly restrained trade if it led to higher prices, reduced output, or reduced quality. The Court found that Standard Oil of New Jersey’s actions led to these consequences and therefore violated the Sherman Antitrust Act.

For example, if a company owned all the gas stations in a town and raised prices significantly, that would be an example of a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The company's actions would be considered anticompetitive and would lead to higher prices for consumers.

standard of care | Standing

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
texaslawhopefully
22:30
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That all sounds great. It sounds like it has fairly diverse cuisine for a smaller city
yeah there are so many good cuisines in ithaca
renard99
22:31
@lilypadfrog: that’s a pity I’da be liking them all
texaslawhopefully
22:31
Only food I’m going to miss for sure if I leave Texas is texmex
22:31
waspy hasnt had thai food in ithaca yet. ithaca thai is so good
^^^^ truuuuuu
22:32
there are two major thai places and they have very similar names bc a divorced husband and wife own them lol
22:32
personally i think taste of thai is better than taste of thai express but thats just me
i had pho tho and it was really good and huge portions
texaslawhopefully
22:32
Glad they have good Thai food, I love Thai food! Can’t wait to visit :)
22:33
when tex goes to ithaca i want to come
Dkk
22:34
Crying Tiger, best Thai dish.
damn im so hungry all i had today was a curry tonkatsu and buldak
and it was a lil baby noodle cup
vvv hungry
22:36
curry tonkatsu so yummeh
22:36
whats even open rn? pizza?
CTB is it i think
22:37
is collegetown pizza not open
22:37
i used to get a slice from there or wings over at like 1am after my shift at the restaurant
Dkk
22:48
Ross Ulbricht free. God Bless Trump. Huge win.
JeremyFragrance
22:54
agreed
texaslawhopefully
22:55
This is an interesting read: https://thedispatch.com/article/birthright-citizenship-trump-implications/
Dkk
23:01
I mean, idk how it's possible to end birth right citizenship without amending the constitution because to me the 14th amendment is pretty clear about it.
ross ulbricht tried to hire a hitman to kill 5 people
i am not that sympathetic to him
Dkk
23:04
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That might have been an FBI agent. It was most likely him and he was most likely doing it to retrieve stolen funds that corrupt FBI agents stole, but yeah moral gray area but me personally, cool with hitmen. It's not like it is uncommon to hire hitmen. I don't think the action itself is necessarily wrong but the intent behind it can be.
Dkk
23:05
Like, Boeing whistblowers being killed by hitmen = wrong but a guy hiring hitmen to retrieve stolen funds = good to me.
texaslawhopefully
23:05
@Dkk: Yeah, for sure. My guess is it'll go to SCOTUS and it'll be 8-1 or 7-2, saying that EO was unconstitutional.
Dkk
23:06
Indeed. I need a count for how many exectuive orders he has signed and how many already have pending lawsuits.
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.