In the case of Federal Trade Commission v. Henry Broch & Co., 1961, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The FTC had charged Henry Broch & Co., a wholesale fruit and produce broker, with violating Section 2(c) of the Clayton Act by accepting brokerage fees from both buyers and sellers in transactions without disclosing this fact to all parties involved. The court held that such undisclosed dual agency was indeed illegal under federal law because it could potentially harm competition. This decision affirmed that brokers must disclose their compensation arrangements to all parties involved in a transaction, thereby promoting transparency and fairness within commercial dealings.

In the dissenting opinion for Federal Trade Commission v. Henry Broch & Co., Justice Whittaker disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Section 2(c) of the Clayton Act, which prohibits brokerage payments except for services rendered. He argued that this provision was intended to prevent large companies from giving or receiving kickbacks disguised as brokerage fees, not to prohibit legitimate and customary business practices such as those engaged in by Henry Broch & Co. The company had acted as a broker between food producers and grocery chains, charging both sides a fee for its services - a common practice in their industry at that time. According to Justice Whittaker, there was no evidence that these fees were excessive or used to manipulate prices unfairly; therefore, they should not be considered illegal under Section 2(c). He concluded his dissent by warning against an overly broad interpretation of antitrust laws that could potentially stifle normal business operations.