Document: 335 U.S. 303 69 S.Ct. 93 L.Ed. 24 FORD MOTOR CO.v.UNITED STATES. COMMERCIAL INV. TRUST CORPORATION et al. v. UNITED Nos. 1 and 2. Argued Oct. 11, 1948. Decided Nov. 15, Appeals from the District Court of United States for Northern Indiana. [Syllabus pages 303-305 intentionally omitted] Mr. Charles E. Hughes, Jr., New York City, appellants. Albert Holmes Baldridge, Oklahoma Okla., appellee. Justice FRANKFURTER delivered opinion Court. These cases were brought here on appeal, prior to revision Title 28, Code, under what was § 345 since September has become 2101 that Title, review final decrees Indiana in a suit equity by 4 Sherman Law, 26 Stat. 209, as amended, 36 1167, 15 U.S.C. 4, U.S.C.A. 4. The present another phase multifarious litigation which been occupying attention federal judicial system more than decade. General Motors Corp., D.C.N.D.Ind., F.Supp. 353; 7th Cir., 121 F.2d 376, certiorari denied 314 618, 62 105, 86 497, rehearing 710, 178, 566; D.C.N.D.Ill., 2 F.R.D. 346; 528; Chrysler Corp. States, 583, 356, 471, 716, 476, 570; 316 556, 1146, 1668. An analytical summary this will make clear immediate issues before us and, indeed, largely dispose them. On May 27, 1938, indictments returned Indiana, South Bend Division, against three leading automobile manufacturers companies financed sale their automobiles. One indictment appellants, Ford Motor Company, Commercial Investment Trust Corporation, Trust, Inc., Universal Credit these referred collectively CIT; Corporation Company; third its subsidiary, Acceptance be abbreviated GMAC. charged jointly named finance with violations Law influencing dealers who sold automobiles respective give business financing dealers' wholesale purchases retail sales 3 Following charges, negotiations set afoot secure elimination through consent practices described indictments. As groups, Government, November 7, filed suits arranged dismissal (For purposes we are not further concerned Chrysler.) Although CIT formally resisted complaint, denying allegations pleading affirmative defenses, decree proceeded. Efforts toward an amicable settlement GMAC failed. Government therefore pressed criminal charges In view competitive conditions industry it obviously became crucial importance any restraints beyond those would fall upon contingencies it. But have enough merely provide accepted should eventually lifted extent imposed at some remote time defined vicissitudes litigation. Protection disadvan tage, appropriateness recognized, required certain end expire if still free Accordingly, decree, entered assured essential equality position unconsenting two explicit conditions. Their terms fully out margin;1 essence can briefly summarized. Paragraph 12 forbids acquiring control company. After enumerating various forbidden forms financial interest, paragraph provides that, obtained January 1, 1941, requiring divest itself all interest GMAC, affiliated company, prohibition cease. second express condition, designed relieve earlier paragraphs means patronize CIT, is found 12a. That addressed possible eventualities proceeding GMAC: (1) Its termination result other judgment conviction; (2) general verdict guilty; (3) special (4) plea guilty or nolo contendere. Upon first contingency restrictive suspended until similar 'deemed determination illegality agreement, act practice held trial court, instructions jury, constitute proper basis return guilty.' fourth were, respectively, deemed determinations 'any practice' subject matter. 5 provisions furnish litmus-paper test determining survive What illegal longer prohibited Ford. sword justice strike both alike. 12a defines how when relaxed. Sub-paragraph after entry Motors, conviction pending proceedings 'or 1940 (whichever date earliest), court application respondent enter orders' suspending restraint (with exceptions now relevant) 'to then imposed, shall substantially identical terms' 6 17, 1939, jury Seventh Circuit affirmed verdict, review. 3114 497; 566. 7 October 1940, finally seeking divestiture too late lapse Ford's agreement December 21, therefore, made motion asking modified moving forward affiliation had entered. Each year new deadline came near extended, consented extension. 31, 1945, again moved 1947. motion, 1946, motions own. They asked suspend sub-paragraph (i) (k) (d) modify (e) ground enjoined 'held also 'an order pursuant * nothing therein preclude Manufacturer retaining ownership and/or over company *.' granted Government's extension appeals followed. particular appealed expired, yet down abeyance outcome appeals. It moot question whether properly See Southern Pacific Co. Interstate Commerce Commission, 219 433, 452, 31 288, 294, 55 283; Terminal 498, 514 516, 279, 283, 310. 8 sub-paragraphs 6(e), 6(i), 6(k) 7(d) must language judge's charge prosecution fairly equated sub-paragraphs. If, hand, falls short holding proscribed, appellants entitled suspension 6(d) modification 6(e). 9 First, then, summarize contents decree.2 6(i) precludes arranging 'that agent together dealer prospective purpose patronize' 'the recommend, endorse advertise Respondent Finance Company public 7(d), counterpart directed CIT. Sup-paragraph 6(e) restrains establishing practice, procedure plan enabling enjoy advantage obtaining patronage equally available Modification only necessary permit them freedom manner otherwise permissible, granted. 10 This brings instructions, which, insofar relevant, forth below.3 plain effect draw line between such cancellation dealer's contract, refusal renew it, discrimination shipment automobiles, use within common understanding 'coercion,' 'persuasion,' 'exposition' 'argument' fair characterizations. mere matter interpreting language, hardly challenges fitness 'argument,' open cover acts presence agents putting claims recommending, endorsing, advertising dealer. specifically decree. insistence advertising, endorsement recommendation violated evidence introduced support charge, might 'coercion' least partly evidence. 12(a)(2) authorize speculative reconstruction jury's process reaching verdict. provided definite standard ascertaining rules law future binding competitor judge formulated thereafter used word exist, call Motors. He words describe conduct usage, Nothing portions erases blurs distinction. seek 'exposition,' 'persuasion' 'argument.' So long remain so there no comparable enjoining substance cannot do without risk violating do. Only lawyer obtuse reckless advise they hazard contempt discussion. Thus fulfilled 11 There remains consideration extended sixth applied begun six years trial. faced same provision reserving right motion. appellant's ground, 'time clause' subsidiary 'main purpose' (68 828) permanancy bar abide civil antitrust Corporation,' 'That intent carried given opportunity propose acquisition showing prevent being placed disadvantage seeks conclusions insisting mechanical decision 1668, involving parallel Chrysler. case decided June 1942. intervening factors problem drastically changed. More nine elapsed concluded; Chrystler two-year delay stretched into ten-year delay. Even half ago, characterized Court's finding proceeded 'diligently expeditiously' 'markedly generous.' page 563, 1150, At fact complete cessation manufacture light trucks minimized significance factor.' Id., 564, 1150. circumstances extenuating behalf compelling ten afterward. While continuance cause may not, practical matter, unreasonably called competition completely during indeterminate period war, resumption full-scale makes unnecessary. And unaffected supply. appe lants agreed limited term refrain pursuing absence adjudication illegal, pursue always pursue. successive extensions expired. degree actual but persistence inequality secured protection. Yet change perpetuate inequality. sustained burden good why grant relief undertaking well understood carefully formulated. If outlaw arrangements corporation, establish very available. 13 reversed remanded inconsistent opinion. 14 Reversed. MURPHY JACKSON took part cases. 16 BLACK, dissenting. 17 appears accept argument treated though contract private persons purchase automobile. contract. A like contest, interest. Swift & Co., 286 106, 114, 115, 52 460, 462, 76 999. means, I suppose, lifted, action tend generate laws. No here. see case, shown aid encourage destruction contrary law. For far existing effective concerned, help appellant crush competitors. 18 (C.I.T.) admission facts original undenied bill sufficient decree's competition-destroying practices. 276 311, 327, 48 315, 72 587. brief summary, facts, relevant take, these: 19 entered, about 25% cars 44%. others sell four billion dollars' worth yearly, cash delivery. customers. About 60% credit. Dealers permitted wholly dependent Ford's, G.M.'s Chrysler's favorable treatment lives. agencies one year, agency contracts canceled notice cause. thus economic dependents whose sell. 375 independent companies, C.I.T. subsidiaries, here, furnished 82% money purchases, 70% purchases. favored got major percentage car loans because supplied offices factories, kept informed sales, gave liberal payment dealt C.I.T., keep books records could transactions sent factory representati es 'persuade' handled satisfactory explanations 20 asks modification. reason suggested group lost portion subjected companies. complain stifles practice; quite contrary, infringes C.I.T.'s monopolistic sanctuary. 21 substance, modifications requested are, acquire ownership, control, company; endorse, dealers; arrange representatives go 'influence' negotiate themselves purchasers Freedom influence appear offer perfect deprive benefits way low rates loan retailers obtain among hundreds country. sure, complaint accepted, stage, power great desperately need helpless resist legalistically not. Due power, afford nice distinctions 'coercion'? believe old methods fail unreasonable trade. 22 remembered neither promised, nor court's action, using overpowering way. rely law; literal treat government prosecutors. officers otherwise, law, even attempt so, think did. Had acquitted laws, merit contention insist injunction acquitted, convicted alleging type pressure 'a find Defendants guilty' 'proved reasonable doubt averred indictment.' True enough, 'as club coerce.' explained dictionary differences abstract 'coercion.' considering concrete abstract, amount while plus Motor's guilty, viewed me persuasion proved showed coerce' violatio agree modify, namely agreements, acts, constituted case. Consequently, met condition reference 23 Nor state record lift ban prohibits corporation whole stock 'another where restrain commerce section community, create monopoly commerce.' 38 731, 732, 18, 18. lessen compete purchasers. volume involves (and probably excess 90%) tendency aggravated. relies competitively injured affiliate borrow alone, allowed subsidiary. proposed legally allowable affiliation, suffer cars. Failure proof respects adequate amend precisely one. We take failed prove disadvantage. Moreover, difficult imagine suffering today's famished market. shows, lose single leaving is. does desire profit, secret open, pay Ford, get dealers. professed thing. ask dictate reveals dealers, purchasers, gives green light. 25 Furthermore, Chrysler, tacit approval today 'affiliate' expected hold responsible, thought ran afoul anti-trust law? Is conceivable 'affiliates' 'vested interest,' acquired approval, aken court? Much talk refined doubts today. financing. Hereafter depend level. sole hope spontaneous generosity thing, laws assume better. 27 affirm judgment. 28 RUTLEDGE concurs dissent. 29 DOUGLAS joins protests lifting '12. manufacturing thing value bonus commission account paper Manufacturer. securities inducing lower payment, writing make, bases, every offering charge; provided, however, contained construed prohibit notes, bonds, commercial paper, indebtedness 'It notwithstanding preceding permanently therein, event, dealing thereof respondents them, foot herein expressly conceded '12a. that: '(1) instituted filing Grand Jury No. 1039, initiated reindictment alleged terminated except event subparagraph operative suspended, requirements subsidiaries either (a) (b) competent jurisdiction (c) although continues effective. reserves party orders accordance paragraph. '(2) said proceeding, followed thereon, guilty. contendere plea. determination, clause, (for clause paragraph) considered equivalent restraining performance unless reversed, based, part, combination heretofore 1041; '(3) litigated review, jurisdiction, hereinbefore to, orders: '(i) each (f) (h) (i), inclusive, terms, (a), (w) (x) (y) effective, (z) paragraph; corresponding subparagraphs (j) different conform decree; '(ii) remaining (b), (g) specified foregoing sub-clause (3), show satisfaction performing sub-paragraphs, sub- sidiaries manner, 7; '(iii) Suspending '(4) hereby 'In divested area class less generally area, making, adjustments, allowances payments reduce approved (but Corporation) receive discriminate area.' full text follows: '(6.) Except 6. service, facility privilege thereto, written request conditions; continue refuse services, facilities privileges giving violation registered designated dealer; specify instance desired; dealer, assist situation requirements, joint conference him representative services (such including delivery regular course business) exclusive them; public; faith: From adopting plans withdrawing modifying same; recommending plans; plans. '7. Company: '(d) Shall his them.' recommend use. cancel act. 'They determine whom product property compels man don't want to; having difficulty itself, defendants did anything wrong; wrongful; theory irrespective outside asserted they, designation grand jurors unknown, actions possibility, ability cancel, clubs force complained insists inspired motive cancellations occurred; discriminations occurred interstate refusals occurred, used. words, complain, defendants' limit select, rights sell, pick own duress accomplish accomplished, something he done will. 'That; almost, case—whether freeman; 'The say: "We never restrictions action.' says question. did—if sort thing—and resulted restriction commerce, you 'If lawsuit end, decide. 'You know, heard terms: 'Exposition; 'Persuasion; 'Argument; 'Coercion. steps. graduated steps suppose salesman goes through, perhaps last. Exposition expound merits sell; explain nature exposition picture has. 'By endeavor persuade person talking offer. 'There little advancement progress, argue. 'Persuasion softer argument, perhaps, argue him, products offered 'All proper. 'He coerce remember all, coercion, coercion exists, ultimate is; Has commerce? evidence.' Quite apart CIT's forego opportunities outlawed urges claiming restrained Law. admitted proven, ascertainment normally depends inferences yield, interdiction decreed put proof. course, affect liability court. will, 12a(3) fetter

Category: 7