Legal Document

60 United States Supreme Court Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 931 99 Reporter 2326 442 U.S. 330 Kathleen R. REITER, Petitioner,v.SONOTONE CORPORATION et al. Number 78-690. Argued April 25, 1979. Decided June 11, Syllabus Petitioner brought a class action on behalf of herself and all persons in the who purchased hearing aids manufactured by respondents, alleging that, because antitrust violations committed she seeks to represent have been forced pay illegally fixed higher prices for related services they from respondents' retail dealers. Treble damages were sought under § 4 Clayton Act, which provides that "[a]ny person shall be injured his business or property reason anything forbidden laws" may bring suit recover treble damages. Respondents moved dismiss claim ground petitioner had not her "business property" within meaning 4. The District held purchaser is "property" if it can shown caused an increase price paid article purchased; however, certified question Appeals. Appeals reversed, holding purchasers consumer goods allege no injury commercial nature are their 4, phrase was intended limit standing those engaged ventures. Held: Consumers personal use as result sustain Pp. 337-345. (a) Statutory construction must begin with language employed Congress. word has naturally broad inclusive comprehending, common usage, material value owned possessed. Congress' disjunctive "or" indicates "business" modify "property," nor "business." Giving independent significance entitled this context does destroy restrictive whole. 337-339. (b) Monetary injury, alone, one's Chattanooga Foundry & Pipe Works versus Atlanta, 203 390, 27 65, 51 L.Ed. 241. Thus, fact deprived only money conclude did injury. 339-340. (c) Nor petitioner's status "consumer" at change suffered intrinsic 340-342. (d) legislative history reflects treble-damages remedy designed protect consumers, one questioned right consumers sue extent 4's relevant, also supports conclusion anticompetitive conduct 342-344 (e) allowing actions such add significant burden federal courts' already overcrowded dockets important but controlling consideration, since Congress created precisely purpose encouraging private challenges violations. Pacific KF135 P2 344 (f) Respondents' arguments cost defending will potentially ruinous effect small businesses particular ultimately policy considerations more properly addressed than Court; any event cannot govern reading plain 344-345 579 Federal Reporter, 2nd 1077, reversed remanded. John E. Thomas, St. Paul, Minn., petitioner. Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 Shenefield, Washington, D. C., States, amicus curiae. Warren Spannaus, Alabama al., Julian Wilheim, Chicago, Ill., Elliot S. Kaplan, Minneapolis, respondents. [Argument Counsel pages 331-333 intentionally omitted] Mr. Chief Justice BURGER delivered opinion Court. 1 We granted certiorari decide whether 38 Statutes-at-Large 731, 15 Code KF62 15. 2 * five corporations, respondents here. Her complaint alleges variety violations, including vertical horizontal fixing.1 Because these alleges, injunctive relief §§ 16 737, amended, 26. 3 dismissal summary judgment Among other things, argued Reiter, use, lacked Act Act. show purchased. relied 396, 66, 241 (1906), set forth Brunswick Corporation Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc., 429 477, 486 n. 10, 97 690, 696, 50 701 (1977), indicating give consumers. 435 F.Supp. 933, 935-938 (Minn.1977). 5 determined, raised "controlling law there substantial difference opinion," id., 938, accordingly interlocutory review 28 1292(b). It then stayed further proceedings case declined express merits issues motions certifiability class. 6 1077 (CA 8 1978). Noting absence holdings precise issue courts appeal, court reasoned Court's statement Hawaii Standard Oil Co., 405 251, 264, 92 885, 892, 31 184 (1972), referred "commercial interests enterprises." A contrary holding, observed, would volume litigation strained could used exact unfair settlements businesses. Small medium-sized retailers especially hard hit "gigantic actions," granting might actually impact consequence. Accordingly, thought "it sensible matter compelled competitive section Act." F.2d, 1087. 7 certiorari, 439 1065, 830, 59 30 (1979).2 reverse.3 II As true every involving statute, our starting point Section provides: 9 "Any laws therefor district . without respect amount controversy, threefold him sustained, suit, reasonable attorney's fee." (emphasis added). 10 On its face, contains little way language. In Pfizer Incorporated Government India, 434 308, 98 584, 54 563 (1978), we remarked: 11 " 'The comprehensive terms coverage, protecting made victims practices whomever perpetrated.' Mandeville Island Farms, American Crystal Sugar 334 219, 236, 68 996, 1328; cf. Perma Life Mufflers, International Parts Corp., 392 134, 138-139, 88 1981, 20 982. And Sherman demonstrates 'any person' intending meaning. There mention floor debates definition." Id., 312, S.Ct., 587. 12 Similarly here, dictionary definitions usage comprehends See, e. g., Webster's Third New Dictionary 1818 (1961). Money, course, form property. 13 protest reference means "money," term becomes superfluous, necessarily involves pecuniary They argue wished permit lost property"; rather, generic akin 16, example, against "threatened loss damage." plainly exclude some category choosing Only interest" gloss, argue, both gives same time "property." argument straightforward: activity business." Brief 7. 14 That us ignore rob ordinary significance; moreover, convert noun into adjective. construing statute obliged effect, possible, used. Menasche, 348 528, 538-539, 75 513, 519-520, 615 (1955). Canons ordinarily suggest connected given separate meanings, unless dictates otherwise; here not. See FCC Pacifica Foundation, 438 726, 739-740, 3026, 3035, 57 1073 (1978). makes When enterprise suffers But neither rendered redundant recognizing enterprise, rather acquiring when artificially inflated complained of. retains significance. would, injuries suffered. Hamman 267 420, 432 (D.C.Mont.1967). property." taxes do, consumer's monetary arising directly out purchase comprehended natural usual simply context. whose diminished violation "in Indeed, indicated much (1906). city alleged defendants water pipes city's system. answered resulting overcharges injure This Court, relying stated: 17 "The property, least, furnishing water, being led worth pipe. payment wrongfully induced U.S., 66. 18 well grounded undisputed supplying charge and, therefore, business. uncommon municipalities companies own operate competing waterworks turn century. operating municipal public utility, real sense water" pipe carry reservoirs customers. Ibid. 19 Yet, deliberately premise "property"—independent sustained water"—because defendants' otherwise paid. therefore establishes Reiter money, albeit modest amount, implicit decision Goldfarb Virginia State Bar, 421 773, 780, 782, 95 2004, 2009-2010, 44 572 (1975). bar association subject legal connection residence. Furthermore, often "consumers" parties seek intimating foreclosed statutory asserting 313-315, 587-589; 696; Hanover Shoe, Shoe Machine 481, 494, 2224, 2232, 1231 (1968); Farms 1006, 1328 (1948). 21 contrary. state's total economy, state redress parens patriae capacity, cognizable noted words refer enterprises," damage done "general economy" harm Hawaii's interests." 892. 22 However, always parsed though dealing statute. Use read context, suggests entity ambit careful "interests" supra. interests" party transaction. apparent explicit reaffirmance rule where "occurs capacity marketplace" through "payment induced," recoverable supra, 263 14, 891. central concern over duplicative recoveries. "large indeterminable part 'general economy' sued "no reflection 'business property' consumers" which, proper showing, right. 263-264, 891-892. 23 $1.2 trillion annually. 1978 Economic Report President 257 (Table B-1). sound obtain lowest possible framework essence ensure fair competition open market. Here, wrongful deprivation aid bought conduct, 24 Nothing conflicts today. Many commentators observed respective histories predecessor, shed light original understanding property."4 Nowhere record specific scope terms. engage speculation arguing substitution broader originally proposed Senator Sherman5 clearly use. None subsequent reflect intent. contrary, "consumer welfare prescription." Bork, Antitrust Paradox 66 Certainly leading proponents legislation perceived what now fixing. Cong.Rec. 2457, 2460, 2558 (1890). 1890 rejected proposal allow group collective class, legislators individual willing relatively amounts. 1767-1768, 2569, 2612, 3147-3148, 3150. At time, questioned.6 25 after examining described "conceived primarily '[t]he people individuals,' consumers," provision 'open[ing] door justice man giv[ing] ample wrong suffered.' 696 10. allegedly 4.7 26 like crowded courts. consideration take find it. These suits provide supplement limited resources available Department enforcing deterring nearly times many currently pending filed Justice. Administrative Office Courts Ann.Rep. 101, Table To sure, impose heavy courts; clear responsibility judicial necessary execute mandates. Finally, event. unimportant considerations, However accurate prove be—and substance—they alert identify frivolous claims extort nuisance settlements; power discretion vested them Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. matters certification management cumbersome actions. generally Durham Dibble, Certification: Practical Device Early Screening Spurious Litigation, B.Y.U.L.Rev. 299. Recognition need administrative chaos, class-action harassment, "windfall" exercise tools available. 29 remanded consistent opinion. Reversed BRENNAN took case. 32 REHNQUIST, concurring. 33 N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions join write separately expressed interpretation manner interprets today "add businesses," ante, 336, unfounded one. pronouncements exhorting "especially settlements" complete solution firing line type litigation. Ante, 345. fully agree wrote it, think observation, 343 6, "the new practical advent Fed.Rules 23" miracle understatement; jurisdictional limit, considerable doubt my mind indeed primary benefit themselves, virtually damages, opposed attorneys stand handsome rewards services. Be may, problem, one, Specifically, violated 209, 2, 14. She restricted territories, customers, brands offered dealers, customer lists dealers purposes, prohibited unauthorized repairing aids, conspired among themselves fix aids. Differing views various Sonotone 1978) (case below); Bravman Bassett Furniture Industries, 552 90, 98-99, (CA3), cert. denied, 823, 69, 80 (1977); Cleary Chalk, 159 U.S.App.D.C. 415, 419 17, 488 1315, 1319 (1973), 416 94 S.ct. 1940, 40 289 (1974); Theophil Sheller-Globe 446 131 (EDNY 1978); Gutierrez Judge Gallo Winery 425 1221 (ND Cal.1977), appeal docketed, 77-1725 9). expressly Reiter's before appeal. 1087 19. view raise claim. refused barred direct-purchaser Illinois Brick company Illinois, 431 720, 2061, 52 707 (1977). 1079 3. us. 261, 890, (1972); Weinberg Federated Stores, 426 880, 882-883 77-1547 9); M. Forkosch, Consumer 2-3 (1956); Comment, Closing Door Standing, N.Y.U.L.Rev. 237, 242-243, 249-252 (1979). Areeda Turner, Law ¶ 106, Pages 14-16 introduced, bill became authorized "any corporation damnified [an unlawful] arrangement, contract, agreement, trust, combination" thereby sustained. 1, 51st Cong., 1st Sess., (1889). Of 23. Although note assumption enacted Hart-Scott-Rodino Improvements 1976, 90 1394, 15c seq. text make 1976 believed cause authorizes states assert capacity. 15c(a)(1), 15c(a)(1)(B)(ii), 15c(b)(2); H.R.Rep.No.94-499, (1975), U.S.Code Cong. Admin.News, Page 2572. 734 2068.

Classification Label: 7