Loewe v. Lawlor
| Loewe v. Lawlor | |
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued December 4–5, 1907 Decided February 3, 1908 |
|
| Full case name | Deitrich Loewe et al. v. Martin Lawlor et al. |
| Citations | 208 U.S. 274 (more)
28 S. Ct. 301; 52 L. Ed. 488
|
| Prior history | Certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit |
| Holding | |
| The Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits any combination whatever to secure action which essentially obstructs the free flow of commerce between the states, or restricts the liberty of a trader to engage in business. | |
| Court membership | |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Fuller, joined by unanimous |
| Laws applied | |
| Sherman Antitrust Act | |
Loewe v. Lawlor, 208 U.S. 274 (1908), also referred to as the Danbury Hatters' Case, is a United States Supreme Court case in US labor law concerning the application of antitrust laws to labor unions. The Court's decision had the effect of outlawing secondary boycotts, violating the Sherman Antitrust Act, in the face of labor union protests that their actions affected only intrastate commerce. It was also decided that individual unionists could be held personally liable for damages incurred by the activities of their union.
In 1901, D. E. Loewe & Company, a fur hat manufacturer, declared itself an open shop. It was the third open shop ever established in Danbury, Connecticut, the center of the pelt industry since 1780. Loewe's declaration sparked a strike and a boycott by the United Hatters of North America (UHU), which had organized 70 out of 82 firms in the hat manufacturing industry. The nationwide boycott was assisted by the American Federation of Labor (AFL) and was successful in persuading retailers, wholesalers and customers not to buy from or do business with Loewe. The goal of the operation was for UHU to gain union recognition as the bargaining agent for employees at Loewe & Co.
Loewe & Co. sued the union for violating the Sherman Antitrust Act, alleging that UHU's boycott interfered with Loewe's ability to engage in the interstate commerce of selling hats. The act had been adopted in 1890, with the primary purpose to control business monopolies. The appellee in the case was Martin Lawlor, the business agent for the UHU, but the list of defendants included 240 union members.
The case was handled in the first instance by the United States Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut, which dismissed the suit on the grounds that the alleged actions fell outside the scope of the Sherman Act. Loewe & Co. appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which certified the case to the Supreme Court.
...
Wikipedia