![]() A few days later Empire began doing business in Arthur's home area of Niangua. Arthur testified that when he refused Plaster said that he was going to put him out of business. Plaster, Empire's president, called and asked that Arthur raise his LP prices. In late 1965, during one of these discussions of price, Shaddox told the Arthurs that Empire was too large to compete with, and could put Arthur out of business. 2 At the time, Arthur was selling gas in the Lebanon area at a lower price than Empire. ![]() During these conversations, Shaddox invariably tried to convince the Arthurs to sell their business to Empire and to set their LP prices higher. Rex Shaddox, one of the top officials of Empire Gas, frequently stopped in to visit with the witness or his father. Arthur competed with Empire in the overlapping Niangua and Lebanon market areas. Arthur, the owner of Arthur Gas and Appliances of Marshfield, Missouri. Exemplary of their testimony is that of W. Several of these competitors testified at trial. 1975), and in a civil antitrust case where the burden of proof is less and there are fewer constitutional strictures, a more restrictive rule is not justified. ![]() Evidence of similar acts not charged is admissible in criminal actions when it is probative of the defendant's intent to commit the crime for which he is under indictment, e. ![]() We have stressed the importance of viewing the evidence as a whole to give the antitrust plaintiff the full benefit of his proof, rather than tightly compartmentalizing the case and wiping the slate clean after considering each piece of evidence. The relevant geographic areas here are the Lebanon and Wheaton market areas however, at oral argument the United States contended that Empire's actions in other areas could support an inference of monopolistic intent in the relevant geographic areas. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |