The Jeanery, Inc., an Oregon Corporation, and Rock Bottom Jean Co., Inc., an Oregon Corporation v. James Jeans, Inc., a Washington Corporation

The Jeanery, Inc., which is affiliated by common ownership with Rock Bottom Jean Co. (collectively referred to as “The Jean-ery”), won a jury verdict in its antitrust suit against James Jeans, Inc., a clothing manufacturer. The Jeanery had alleged, and the jury found, that James Jeans conspired with other of its dealers to fix the resale price for James Jeans’ products in violation of section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 , and that James Jeans terminated The Jeanery as one of its distributors because The Jeanery refused to sell its goods at the desired resale price. The jury awarded The Jeanery damages in the amount of $80,556.50, which the magistrate, sitting as a district court judge, see 28 U.S.C. § 636 (c)(1), automatically trebled under section 4 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 15 .

James Jeans then moved for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (“JNOV”) or in the alternative for a new trial. Upon reflection, the court concluded that there was insufficient evidence of a price-fixing conspiracy to submit to the jury and, accordingly, granted the motion for JNOV. The Jeanery appeals from this judgment, arguing that there was substantial evidence supporting the…

dissenting:

A jury found that James Jeans, Inc., had violated the antitrust laws by unlawfully terminating one of its dealers, The Jeanery, Inc., and awarded damages. The trial court, relying primarily on Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corp., 465 U.S. 752 , 104 S.Ct. 1464 , 79 L.Ed.2d 775 (1984), granted a judgment non obstante veredic-to in favor of James Jeans. The majority issued an opinion affirming the district court, in which it concluded, on the basis of Monsanto, that The Jeanery did not offer sufficient evidence for a jury to find that an antitrust violation had occurred — specifically, that there was insufficient evidence of an agreement to terminate its franchise. Because I disagreed with the majority’s interpretation and application of Monsanto, and its failure to follow an earlier Supreme Court opinion, United States v. Parke, Davis, I filed a dissent. After the majority and dissenting opinions were issued, the Supreme Court decided Business Electronics Corp. v. Sharp Electronics Corp., — U.S. -, 108 S.Ct. 1515 , 99 L.Ed.2d 808 (1988). The majority then prepared an amended opinion, adding an additional ground for its conclusion — namely, that there was…

849 F.2d 1148 56 USLW 2678 , 1988-1 Trade Cases 67,988 THE JEANERY, INC., an Oregon Corporation, and Rock Bottom Jean Co., Inc., an Oregon Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. JAMES JEANS, INC., a Washington Corporation, Defendant-Appellee. No. 85-3751. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 5, 1986. Decided May 2, 1988. As Amended June 2, 1988. Justine Fischer, Stoll & Stoll, P.C., Portland, Or., for plaintiffs-appellants. James H. Clarke, Spears, Lubersky, Campbell, Bledsoe, Anderson & Young, Portland, Or., for defendant-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. Before ALARCON, REINHARDT and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges. DAVID R. THOMPSON, Circuit Judge: 1 The Jeanery, Inc., which is affiliated by common ownership with Rock Bottom Jean Co. (collectively referred to as "The Jeanery"), won a jury verdict in its antitrust suit against James Jeans, Inc., a clothing manufacturer. The Jeanery had alleged, and the jury found, that James Jeans conspired with other of its dealers to fix the resale price for James Jeans' products in violation of section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 1 , and that James…