SUNKIST GROWERS, INC. v. WINCKLER & SMITH CITRUS PRODUCTS CO., 368 U.S. 813 (1961)

U.S. Supreme Court

SUNKIST GROWERS, INC. v. WINCKLER & SMITH CITRUS PRODUCTS CO. , 368 U.S. 813 (1961)

368 U.S. 813

SUNKIST GROWERS, INC., et al., petitioners,
v.
WINCKLER & SMITH CITRUS PRODUCTS CO. et al.
No. 241.

Supreme Court of the United States

October 9, 1961

Ross C. Fisher and Herman F. Selvin, for petitioners.

William C. Dixon, for respondents.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted limited to Question 1 presented by the petition which reads as follows:

    '1. Where a group of citrus fruit growers form a cooperative organization for the purpose of collectively processing and marketing their fruit, and carry out those functions through the agency of three co-operative agricultural associations, each of which is basically wholly owned and governed by those growers, and each of which is admittedly entitled to the exemption from the antitrust laws accorded to agricultural cooperatives by the Capper-Volstead Act (7 U. S.C.A., sec. 291)-is an unlawful conspiracy, combination or agreement established under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act [15 U.S.C.A. 1, 2] upon proof only that these growers, through the agency of these three cooperatives, agreed among only themselves with respect to the extent of the division of the function of processing between them or with respect to the price they would charge in the open market for the fruit and the by-products thereof processed and marketed by them?'

The case is transferred to the summary calendar.[ Sunkist Growers, Inc. v. Winckler & Smith Citrus Products Co. 368 U.S. 813 (1961) ]


U.S. Supreme Court

SUNKIST GROWERS, INC. v. WINCKLER & SMITH CITRUS PRODUCTS CO. , 368 U.S. 813 (1961)

368 U.S. 813

SUNKIST GROWERS, INC., et al., petitioners,
v.
WINCKLER & SMITH CITRUS PRODUCTS CO. et al.
No. 241.

Supreme Court of the United States

October 9, 1961

Ross C. Fisher and Herman F. Selvin, for petitioners.

William C. Dixon, for respondents.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted limited to Question 1 presented by the petition which reads as follows:

    '1. Where a group of citrus fruit growers form a cooperative organization for the purpose of collectively processing and marketing their fruit, and carry out those functions through the agency of three co-operative agricultural associations, each of which is basically wholly owned and governed by those growers, and each of which is admittedly entitled to the exemption from the antitrust laws accorded to agricultural cooperatives by the Capper-Volstead Act (7 U. S.C.A., sec. 291)-is an unlawful conspiracy, combination or agreement established under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act [15 U.S.C.A. 1, 2] upon proof only that these growers, through the agency of these three cooperatives, agreed among only themselves with respect to the extent of the division of the function of processing between them or with respect to the price they would charge in the open market for the fruit and the by-products thereof processed and marketed by them?'

The case is transferred to the summary calendar.[ Sunkist Growers, Inc. v. Winckler & Smith Citrus Products Co. 368 U.S. 813 (1961) ]

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.

Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.