
Spectrum Sports, Inc. v. McQuillan
United States Supreme Court
506 U.S. 447 (1993)
Relevant factsFree
After the McQuillans (plaintiffs) refused to give up their athletic sorbothane distributorship, the sorbothane producers (defendants) cut off their supply, gave their athletic distributorship to Spectrum Sports (defendant), and began selling a competing horseshoe pad themselves; a jury found for the McQuillans on their attempted-monopolization claim, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed, holding no market definition was required if anticompetitive conduct was shown.
IssueFree
Whether a claim for attempted monopolization in violation of § 2 of the Sherman Act requires a showing of the relevant market.
Related cases
Bell Atlantic v. Twombly550 U.S. 544 (2007)United States v. Grinnell Corporation384 U.S. 563 (1966)United States v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.351 U.S. 377 (1956)United States v. Aluminum Co. of America148 F.2d 416 (1945)Federal Trade Commission v. Indiana Federation of Dentists476 U.S. 447 (1986)