Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper Co., 282 U.S. 555 (1931)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 282 U.S. 545, click here.
Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper Co.
No. 57
Argued January 19, 20, 1931
Decided February 24, 1931
282 U.S. 555
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
Syllabus
1. On review by certiorari, respondents, without necessity of a cross-petition, may invoke as an additional ground for sustaining the judgment of the lower court a ground which that court had found against them. P. 560.
2. In an action under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, on an issue as to whether there was evidence of a conspiracy or combination to monopolize interstate trade, this Court, upon examination of the record, finds evidence sufficient to preclude interference with concurrent findings of courts below. P. 560.
3. Evidence held sufficient to show that petitioner in an action for damages under Sherman Anti-Trust Act was injured in its business and property as result of respondents’ unlawful combination. P. 560.
4. Assumption indulged by the appellate court that respondents’ acts would have been the same if they had been acting independently of one another rejected as unsound in light of evidence and instruction warranting finding by jury that price-cutting and resulting lower prices were directly attributable to unlawful combination. P. 561.
5. Characterization of verdict under Sherman Act, which included damages measured by difference between amounts actually realized by petitioner and what would have been realized by it from sales at reasonable prices except for unlawful acts of respondents, as based upon mere speculation and conjecture, held unwarranted. P. 562.
6. The rule which precludes the recovery of uncertain damages applies to such as are not the certain result of the wrong, not to those damages which are definitely attributable to the wrong and only uncertain in respect of their amount. P. 562.
7. Where the tort itself is of such a nature as to preclude the ascertainment of the amount of damages with certainty, it is enough if the evidence show the extent of the damages as a matter of just and reasonable inference, although the result be only approximate. The wrongdoer is not entitled to complain that they cannot be measured with the exactness and precision that would be possible if the case, which he alone is responsible for making, were otherwise. P. 563.
8. Question whether acts of respondents in violation of Sherman Act or conditions apart from them constituted the proximate cause of depreciation in value of petitioner’s property held, upon evidence in record, for the jury. P. 566.
9. Finding of jury on question of proximate cause must be allowed to stand unless all reasonable men, exercising unprejudiced judgment, would draw an opposite conclusion from the facts. P. 566.
10. Evidence as to extent to which value of petitioner’s property was diminished by acts of respondents in violation of Sherman Act held sufficiently certain and definite to support verdict of jury. P. 567.
11. On certiorari to review a judgment of the circuit court of appeals, the entire record is before this Court with power to review the action of the appellate court and direct such disposition of the case as that court might have made of it upon the appeal from the district court; accordingly, assignments of error made on the appeal from the district court, which were not considered below, may be examined and disposed of here. P. 567.
37 F.2d 537 reversed.
Certiorari, 281 U.S. 711, to review a judgment of the circuit court of appeals which reversed a judgment for damages recovered by the present petitioner in an action under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.