United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. et al. (334 U.S. 131)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided May 3, 1948 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 334 U.S. 131 · 68 S. Ct. 915
- Docket
- No. 79
- Argued
- February 9, 1948
- Decided
- May 3, 1948
- Term
- October Term 1947
- Vote
- 7–1
- Majority author
- Justice Douglas
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Disposition
- Affirmed and reversed (or vacated) in part and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
How the Justices voted
- Majority
- Chief Justice Vinson, Justice Burton, Justice Douglas (wrote), Justice Reed, Justice Black, Justice Rutledge, Justice Murphy
- Dissenting
- Justice Frankfurter (wrote)
Opinion excerpt
Mr. Justice Douglas delivered the opinion of the Court. These cases are here on appeal from a judgment of a three-judge District Court holding that the defendants had violated § 1 and § 2 of the Sherman Act, 26 Stat. 209, as amended, 50 Stat. 693, 15 U. S. C. §§ 1, 2, and granting an injunction and other relief. 66 F. Supp. 323; 70 F. Supp. 53. The suit was instituted by the United States under § 4 of the Sherman Act to prevent and restrain violations of it. The defendants fall into three groups: (1) Paramount Pictures, Inc., Loew’s, Incorporated, Radio-Keith-Orpheum Corporation, Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc., Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation, which produce motion pictures, and their respective subsidiaries or affiliates which distribute and exhibit films. These are known as the five major defendants or exhibitor-defendants. (2) Columbia Pictures Corporation and Universal Corporation, which produce motion pictures, and their subsidiaries which distribute films. (3) United Artists Corporation, which is engaged only in the distribution of motion pictures. The five majors, through their subsidiaries or affiliates, own or control theatres; the other defendants do not. The complaint charged that the producer defendants had attempted to monopolize and had monopolized the production of motion pictures. The District Court found to the contrary and that finding is not challenged…
Excerpt of a 79,604-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.