Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Eugene

(61,914 posts)
Thu Aug 8, 2019, 07:31 PM Aug 2019

Pork producers win dismissal of price-fixing lawsuits - U.S. judge

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - A federal judge on Thursday dismissed antitrust lawsuits accusing several U.S. pork companies of conspiring to limit supply in the $20 billion-a-year market, in order to inflate prices and their own profits at the expense of consumers and other purchasers.

Chief Judge John Tunheim of the federal court in Minneapolis said the plaintiffs failed to show “parallel conduct” among the companies, whose combined U.S. market share exceeds 80%, to suggest they had conspired beginning in 2009 to fix prices.

The defendants included Hormel Foods Corp, the JBS USA unit of Brazil’s JBS SA, WH Group Ltd’s Smithfield Foods Inc, and Tyson Foods Inc, among others, as well as data provider Agri Stats Inc.

They said the plaintiffs failed to allege any agreement to rig prices, and that supply and capacity actually increased.

-snip-

BUSINESS NEWS AUGUST 8, 2019 / 4:43 PM / UPDATED AN HOUR AGO
Jonathan Stempel
3 MIN READ


Read more: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pork-lawsuit/pork-producers-win-dismissal-of-price-fixing-lawsuits-u-s-court-ruling-idUSKCN1UY2PS

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Pork producers win dismissal of price-fixing lawsuits - U.S. judge (Original Post) Eugene Aug 2019 OP
Pork. sandensea Aug 2019 #1
I completely agree canuckledragger Aug 2019 #2
But they LUV their billion-dollar subsidies. sandensea Aug 2019 #3
There was no agreement in restrain of trade. djg21 Aug 2019 #4
Post removed Post removed Aug 2019 #5
This message was self-deleted by its author djg21 Aug 2019 #6
Actually I know the law. djg21 Aug 2019 #7

canuckledragger

(1,644 posts)
2. I completely agree
Thu Aug 8, 2019, 08:28 PM
Aug 2019

They have a monopoly and want to protect it, and don't give a fuck about the low wage earners that have to buy their shit at inflated prices.

 

djg21

(1,803 posts)
4. There was no agreement in restrain of trade.
Thu Aug 8, 2019, 10:09 PM
Aug 2019

Section 1 of the Sherman Act prohibits agreements in restraint of trade. Parallel conduct evidences a tacit agreement. The market was concentrated, meaning a relatively small number of competitors held a significant share of the market, but no one company held a monopoly. If one did, there would have been a monopolization claim brought under Sherman Act section 2.

Response to djg21 (Reply #4)

Response to Post removed (Reply #5)

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Pork producers win dismis...