The U.S. Supreme Court case Abbott Laboratories et al. v. Portland Retail Druggists Association, Inc., 1975, revolved around the issue of whether pharmaceutical manufacturers could provide quantity discounts to hospitals that were unavailable to retail pharmacies under the Non-Profit Institutions Act (NPIA). The Portland Retail Druggists Association sued several drug companies including Abbott Laboratories alleging this practice was a violation of antitrust laws as it created an unfair competition environment where hospitals could resell discounted drugs at lower prices than retail pharmacies. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the drug companies stating that such discounts did not violate NPIA and were permissible if they are limited to drugs used for 'own use' by qualifying institutions like hospitals or health care facilities.

In the dissenting opinion for Abbott Laboratories et al. v. Portland Retail Druggists Assn., Inc., Justice William O. Douglas argued that the majority's interpretation of Section 107(c)(3) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act was incorrect and overly broad in scope. He contended that this section should only apply to situations where a drug is being sold at retail without prescription, not when it is being sold by a manufacturer or wholesaler to retailers or hospitals as interpreted by the majority ruling. Furthermore, he disagreed with their assertion that Congress intended for manufacturers and wholesalers to be able to set prices on drugs they sell directly to consumers via prescriptions filled at pharmacies; instead arguing that such an interpretation would undermine competition among pharmacies which could lead to higher prices for consumers - something he believed Congress sought specifically avoid when drafting this legislation.