Industrial Association v. United States, 268 U.S. 64 (1925)

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 268 U.S. 55, click here.

Industrial Association of San Francisco v. United States

No. 365

Argued March 10, 1925
Decided April 13, 1925
268 U.S. 64

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Syllabus

For the purpose of freeing the local building industry from domination by trade unions, numerous building contractors and dealers in building materials in San Francisco combined to establish, in effect, the "open shop" plan of employment, by requiring builders who desired building materials of certain specified kinds to obtain permits therefor from a Builders’ Exchange, and by refusing such permits to those who did not support the plan. Held that the combination did not violate the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, because

(1) Its object was confined to a purely local matter, and interference with interstate commerce was neither intended nor desired. P. 77.

(2) The materials for which permits were required were all produced in California, except one kind as to which permits were required only after they had entered the state and become commingled with the common mass of local property, so that their interstate movement and commercial status had ended. P. 78.

(3) Any interference with the free movement of supplies from other states was incidental, indirect, and remote, due merely to lack of demand for such supplies upon the part of builders who, through being unable to purchase the local permit materials, were unable to go on with their jobs. P. 80.

(4) Instances in which it was alleged that persons in other states were directly prevented or discouraged from shipping into California were either not proven or were related to a practice abandoned long before the suit was instituted, with no probability of renewal, or were sporadic and doubtful and of so little weight as evidence of the conspiracy alleged as to call for application of the maximum de minimis non currat lex. P. 83.

293 F. 925 reversed.

Appeal from a decree of the district court enjoining the appellant associations, corporations, and individuals from conduct found to violate the Anti-Trust Act.