Catalano, Inc. v. Target Sales, Inc.
United States Supreme Court
446 U.S. 643 (1980)
A group of competing beer wholesalers (defendants) simultaneously stopped offering the interest-free, up-to-42-day credit terms that had previously varied between wholesalers and functioned as a competitive dimension of the beer market; beer retailers (plaintiffs) sued, arguing this coordinated elimination of credit constituted per se illegal price fixing, but the district court and court of appeals held that an agreement to fix credit terms wasn't automatically a per se violation, reasoning removal of the credit term could even increase competition by lowering entry barriers.
Whether an agreement among competing wholesalers to simultaneously eliminate a previously competitive credit term extended to retailers constitutes price fixing subject to per se condemnation under antitrust law.