In U.S. Steel Corp. v. Fortner Enterprises, U.S. Steel loaned Fortner money to buy mobile homes from the company to put in his mobile home park, the Supreme Court held that it was:
A) illegal for U.S. Steel to tie the sale of the homes to the financing
B) an illegal boycott for U.S. Steel to refuse to lend the money once they sold the homes
C) illegal for the homes to be sold with the financing since it created an exclusive deal
D) not illegal to tie the sale of the homes with the financing because there was no monopoly power involved
E) not price discrimination under the Robinson-Patman Act to fix the home price together with the financing rate
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q355: Which of the following conditions must be
Q356: In U.S. Steel Corp. v. Fortner Enterprises,
Q357: The recently enacted Anti-Monopoly Law in the
Q358: Tie-in arrangements are allowed under which of
Q359: In Eastman Kodak v. Image Technical Services,
Q361: Charging different prices in different markets for
Q362: When a group of competitors conspire to
Q363: Which of the following is probably an
Q364: The 1936 legislation known as the Robinson-Patman
Q365: Price discrimination was made unlawful by:
A) the
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents