Document: 414 U.S. 113 94 S.Ct. 466 38 L.Ed.2d 344 CHICAGO MERCANTILE EXCHANGEv.Darryl B. DEAKTOR et al. No. 73—241. Dec. 3, 1973. PER CURIAM. 1 The petitioner, Chicago Mercantile Exchange, was sued in two separate actions the District Court. In one, Phillips suit, it alleged that Exchange had forced sales of futures contracts March 1970 fresh eggs at artificially depressed market prices and thereby monopolized restrained commerce violation §§ 2 Sherman Act, 26 Stat. 209, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 1, 2, violated § 9(b) Commodity Act (CEA), 82 33, 7 13(b), by manipulating a commodity for future delivery on contract market. also accused violating 5a CEA, 7a(8), failure to enforce one its own rules. second Deaktor case, charged with CEA rules designated because failed exercise due care halt manipulative conduct certain members who allegedly cornered July frozen pork bellies contracts. defended both ground faithfully discharging statutory duty self-regulation. It asserted challenged acts case were measures taken prevent speculation such not CEA. Rather, they authorized required statute hence cannot be considered within reach antitrust laws. Likewise, claimed all proper reasonable steps perform responsibility manipulation. 3 further urged Commission jurisdiction determine whether or impose sanctions any offense, suits should stayed permit first instance under scrutiny discharge duties regulations. Court refused stay, Appeals affirmed. v. L. D. Schreiber & Co., 479 F.2d 529 (CA7 1973). Both courts error. 4 Ricci 409 289, 93 573, 34 525 (1973), held an action against have been afford opportunity if compliance Because administrative adjudication violations lay heart task assigned Congress, we recognized court, although retaining final authority interpret relationship laws, avail itself abilities unravel intricate technical facts industry arrive some judgment conducted law. An would necessarily dispose question immunity from liability. We nevertheless thought view sufficient aid court go forward without making efforts invoke Commission. Id., 305—306, 573. As did Ricci. 5 'we simply recognize Congress has established specialized agency either . rule followed. Either require determination interpretation application And will great help arriving essential accommodation between regulator regime ..' 307, S.Ct., 583. 6 our judgment, Appeals, Ricci, requested stay proceedings For very similar reasons, plaintiffs, routed whose functions appear encompass kind substantive claims made this case. petition writ certiorari is granted, reversed, remanded consistent opinion. 8 So ordered. 9 Reversed remanded. 10 Mr. Justice STEWART dissents. He affirm substantially upon reasoning Judge Castle's concurring opinion Appeals. 529, 535.

Category: 8