Reiter v. Sonotone Corp.

Supreme Court

442 U.S. 330 (1979)

Relevant factsFree

Reiter (plaintiff) sued on behalf of a class of hearing-aid buyers, claiming Sonotone Corporation and five other manufacturers (Sonotone) (defendants) had illegally fixed hearing-aid prices, causing Reiter and the class to overpay. Reiter sought treble damages under § 4 of the Clayton Act. Sonotone moved to dismiss, arguing that Reiter, as a retail consumer who merely lost money, hadn't suffered the kind of "injury to business or property" that § 4 requires.

IssueFree

Whether a consumer who has lost money due to an antitrust violation has standing to bring a claim under § 4 of the Clayton Act for treble damages.

Holding & reasoning

The court resolved the question by applying the controlling rule to the facts and explaining precisely why the outcome followed. Its reasoning ties the doctrine to the record so you can reproduce the analysis on an exam.

Procedural history, concurrence & dissent

This section traces the case from the trial court through appeal and lays out how each opinion lands. Separate writings sharpen the majority's limits and flag the arguments most likely to resurface in class.

Unlock the full brief

Free accounts read 20 full briefs. No card required.

Start free Log in