The U.S. Supreme Court case Utah Pie Co. v. Continental Baking Co., et al., 1966, revolved around allegations of anti-competitive practices in the frozen dessert pie market in Salt Lake City, Utah. The plaintiff, Utah Pie Company, accused three national baking companies - Continental Baking Company, Pet Milk Company and Carnation Company - of selling their pies at lower prices within the Salt Lake City area than elsewhere in the country to drive local competitors out of business; a practice known as predatory pricing or price discrimination under Section 2(a) of the Clayton Act as amended by Robinson-Patman Act. The defendants argued that they had not caused any harm because despite their actions, Utah Pie's market share increased during this period. However, Justice Byron White writing for majority held that evidence showing substantial loss suffered by defendants due to discriminatory pricing was sufficient proof for potential injury to competition even if there was no decrease in competitor’s sales volume or market shares (Utah Pies). Therefore it upheld jury verdict finding all three defendant companies guilty of price discrimination intending to monopolize trade and commerce among several states.

The dissenting opinion in the Utah Pie Co. v. Continental Baking Co., et al case argued that the majority's decision was based on an incorrect interpretation of antitrust laws, specifically Section 2(a) of the Clayton Act as amended by Robinson-Patman Act. The dissenters believed that lower prices were not inherently indicative of predatory pricing or unfair competition and could be a result of legitimate competitive practices such as cost savings from economies of scale. They also disagreed with the majority's view that market share fluctuations alone can prove anti-competitive behavior, arguing instead for a more comprehensive analysis considering all relevant factors including price-cost relationships and intent to monopolize. Furthermore, they criticized the court’s ruling for potentially discouraging price competition which would ultimately harm consumers.