In the Continental Ore Co. v. Union Carbide & Carbon Corp case of 1961, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Continental Ore Co., reversing a lower court's decision. The plaintiffs, including Vanadium Corporation and Electro Metallurgical Company, alleged that defendants (Union Carbide & Carbon Corp) had conspired to monopolize trade and commerce in violation of Sherman Antitrust Act by controlling access to vanadium - a key mineral for steel production. They claimed that this control over supply was used as leverage to manipulate prices and restrict competition within the industry. The Supreme Court held that evidence presented should be considered collectively rather than individually when determining if antitrust violations occurred; thus allowing circumstantial evidence into consideration which supported plaintiff’s claims about defendant’s anti-competitive behavior.

In the dissenting opinion for Continental Ore Co. v. Union Carbide & Carbon Corp., Justice Whittaker argued that the majority's decision to reverse and remand was based on a misinterpretation of evidence and an incorrect application of antitrust laws. He contended that there was no substantial evidence showing that defendants had conspired to monopolize or restrain trade in vanadium, as alleged by plaintiffs. The fact that defendants purchased large quantities of imported vanadium ore did not necessarily imply they intended to prevent others from obtaining it; rather, this could be seen as normal business behavior in a competitive market environment. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority’s view about predatory pricing practices since prices were set at levels consistent with those prevailing internationally which indicated absence of any price manipulation efforts by defendants.