Cargill, Inc., et al. v. Monfort of Colorado, Inc. (479 U.S. 104)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided December 9, 1986 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 479 U.S. 104 · 107 S. Ct. 484
- Decided
- December 9, 1986
- Term
- October Term 1986
- Vote
- 6–2
- Majority author
- Justice Brennan
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Brennan delivered the opinion of the Court. Under § 16 of the Clayton Act, 38 Stat. 737, as amended, 15 U. S. C. § 26, private parties “threatened [with] loss or damage by a violation of the antitrust laws” may seek injunctive relief. This case presents two questions: whether a plaintiff seeking relief under § 16 must prove a threat of antitrust injury, and, if so, whether loss or damage due to increased competition constitutes such injury. f — I Respondent Monfort of Colorado, Inc. (Monfort), the plaintiff below, owns and operates three integrated beef-packing plants, that is, plants for both the slaughter of cattle and the fabrication of beef. Monfort operates in both the market for fed cattle (the input market) and the market for fabricated beef (the output market). These markets are highly competitive, and the profit margins of the major beef packers are low. The current markets are a product of two decades of intense competition, during which time packers with modern integrated plants have gradually displaced packers with separate slaughter and fabrication plants. Monfort is the country’s fifth-largest beef packer. Petitioner Excel Corporation (Excel), one of the two defendants below, is the second-largest packer. Excel operates five integrated plants and one fabrication plant. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of Cargill, Inc., the other defendant below, a large…
Excerpt of a 54,154-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.