Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

United States v. Von's Grocery Co. Et Al.

• 1965 • 384 U.S. 270 • Warren Court
In the United States v. Von's Grocery Co. et al., 1965, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a merger between two grocery chains in Los Angeles violated Section 7 of the Clayton Act, which prohibits mergers and acquisitions where the effect may substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly. The case was brought by the government against Von’s Grocery Company and Shopping Bag Food Stores after they merged in 1960 to form one entity controlling just over seven percent of LA’s retail...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Warren Court
Term: 1965
Docket: 303
384 U.S. 270
86 S. Ct. 1478
16 L. Ed. 2d 555
1966 U.S. LEXIS 2823
Argued: Mar 22, 1966

United States v. Von's Grocery Co. Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the United States v. Von's Grocery Co. et al., 1965, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a merger between two grocery chains in Los Angeles violated Section 7 of the Clayton Act, which prohibits mergers and acquisitions where the effect may substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly. The case was brought by the government against Von’s Grocery Company and Shopping Bag Food Stores after they merged in 1960 to form one entity controlling just over seven percent of LA’s retail grocery market share. Despite this relatively small percentage, it was enough for Justice Potter Stewart to write for majority stating that even minor increases in concentration could have anti-competitive effects under certain circumstances. This decision has been criticized as overly strict because it seemed to suggest any increase in concentration would violate antitrust laws regardless of actual competitive impact.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Von's Grocery Co., Justice Stewart disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Section 7 of the Clayton Act, arguing that it was not intended to prevent all mergers and acquisitions which might potentially decrease competition. He contended that this broad interpretation would stifle growth in American businesses and hinder economic progress. According to him, a more reasonable approach would be to only prohibit those mergers which create a monopoly or substantially lessen competition. In this case, he did not believe that merging two relatively small grocery chains in Los Angeles could significantly impact competitive conditions in such an extensive market area.

Opinion written by Justice HLBlack
Decided: May 31, 1966
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms