Opinion ID: 1059643
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: the antitrust case

Text: After Reid was terminated as president of Cellar Door Productions, he founded Rising Tide Productions, Inc., a Virginia corporation which is a promoter of live music entertainment. Reid serves as president of Rising Tide Productions. Reid and Rising Tide Productions contend that defendants Boyle, MacDonald, Tabor, The Boathouse Food Service Company, Cellar Door Productions, and Cellar Door Venues prevented Reid and Rising Tide Productions from booking concerts at two publicly owned, unique, essential concert venues, the GTE Virginia Beach Amphitheater and The Boathouse. The Boathouse is a concert facility with a capacity of approximately 2,460. The City of Norfolk owns The Boathouse, which is leased by The Boathouse Food Service Company, a corporation which is a part of the Cellar Door family of companies. MacDonald is president and general manager of Cellar Door Productions. Tabor is the general manager of the Virginia Beach Amphitheater. Reid and Rising Tide Productions presented evidence that their attorneys forwarded a letter to the defendants' attorneys and inquired how Reid and Rising Tide Productions might rent the Virginia Beach Amphitheater and The Boathouse. Reid testified that when he attempted to rent the amphitheater, he was denied permission to do so. Additionally, William B. Wells, a promoter, testified that an employee of the Cellar Door Companies tried to discourage Wells from transacting business with Reid and Rising Tide Productions. The Cellar Door Companies employee warned Wells that he should not transact business with Reid. Michael Mitnick, a certified public accountant, testified that the ability to rent The Boathouse and the amphitheater is essential to a Virginia Beach concert promoter such as Reid. He opined that concert bands that perform in large outdoor amphitheaters are required to transact business with the defendants because they control all the large amphitheaters in Virginia and North Carolina. Reid and Rising Tide Productions sought injunctive relief against the defendants for their purported violations of the Virginia Antitrust Act. The chancellor dismissed Reid's antitrust claims and entered a judgment on behalf of the defendants. Reid asserts, among other things, that the chancellor erred in failing to grant the requested injunctive relief. Responding, the defendants assert that Reid and Rising Tide Productions failed to prove that the defendants violated the Virginia Antitrust Act. We agree with the defendants. Code § 59.1-9.2 of the Virginia Antitrust Act states: The purpose of this chapter is to promote the free market system in the economy of this Commonwealth by prohibiting restraints of trade and monopolistic practices that act or tend to act to decrease competition. This chapter shall be construed in accordance with the legislative purpose to implement fully the Commonwealth's police power to regulate commerce. Code § 59.1-9.5 states: Every contract, combination or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce of this Commonwealth is unlawful. Code § 59.1-9.6 states: Every conspiracy, combination, or attempt to monopolize, or monopolization of, trade or commerce of this Commonwealth is unlawful. Code § 59.1-9.12(a) states: Any person threatened with injury or damage to his business or property by reason of a violation of this chapter may institute an action or proceeding for injunctive relief when and under the same conditions and principles as injunctive relief is granted in other cases. The record is simply devoid of sufficient facts that would have permitted the chancellor to conclude that the defendants violated any of the aforementioned statutes. Reid and Rising Tide Productions failed to prove the existence of any contract or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce. Additionally, Reid and Rising Tide Productions failed to establish the existence of a conspiracy, combination, or attempt by the defendants to monopolize trade or commerce in this Commonwealth.