Units of Paper and Puff: The law ..., so far as price-fixing up agreements are concerned, establishes one uniform rule applicable to all industries alike. United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U.S. 150, 222 (1940). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange Colleagues, In spite of direct disclosures, there remains an enormous academic and professional misunderstanding about real simple law of contract price. Ultimately binding authority is and has long been firmly established on this simple subject. There is one simple rule that uniformly governs all business in all industries. The highest court in our nation reminded of this age old rule its seminal 1940 Vacuum case: The law and the Sherman Act, so far as price-fixing up agreements are concerned, establishes one uniform rule applicable to all industries alike. There are not two rules, there are not three rules. There is one rule only. All price makers are required to add all of their overhead costs (on paper), estimate a ‘fair average hourly compensation for labor’, and set one price accordingly…. “All other forms of pricing are per se illegal violations ….” That means “percentage pricing”, “square foot pricing” and match pricing by getting and using rivals’ prices, for example, are all per se illegal breaches of duty. This “one size fits all” rule is specifically modified by the basic contract covenant of adding in good faith, not hiding the numbers, and tendering the paperwork for client review. “Uniform” means it controls the price of wages too. This is not a rule of law that can be “waived” or “signed away” by contract. A signed contract does not sanctify a “declared illegal” under the law. No judge, executive or legislature is licensed violate it. It is a “prima facie” abuse of discretion for a court to fudge around it. There is no “discretion”, authority or jurisdiction to do anything but to demand compliance. “Price is too critical, too sensitive a control to allow it to be used even in an informal manner to restrain competition.” “Neither good intentions of the parties nor some good results may offset the public right to be free from competitive restraints.” “It is not for the courts to determine whether … price-fixing serves an honorable or worthy end!” The law of one price is ultra draconian. So much so that it mantles those who know about, but fail to report violations, guilty of misprision of treason - 18 USC §2382: Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any law of price treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon possible, disclose and make known the same to … some judge of the United States, or … to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason …. Further academic clarification is attached - with hard, certified bits of violation evidence. United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U.S. 150, 222 (1940). Competitive Strategy, at page 242, by Michael E. Porter (Free Press 1980); Garrett v. Coast & Southern Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. (1973) 9 Cal.3d 731, 738-739. U.S. v. Container, 393 U.S. 333 (1960); citing United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U. S. 150 (1940). Penne and Penne Realty, Inc., v. The Greater Minneapolis Area Board of Realtors, 604 F.2d 1143 (8th Cir. 1979). Sutherland v. Barclays American/Mortgage Corp., 53 Cal. App. 4th 299 (1997); see also Witkin, Summary of California Law, Contracts, §743. Economics in One Lesson, Chapter 8 (Henry Hazlitt, 6th Printing 1948 Harper & Brothers). U.S. v. Container, 393 U.S. 333 at 338 (1969). People v. National Association of Realtors, 120 Cal.App.3d 459, 481 (1981). Witkin, Summary of California Law Ninth Edition, Contracts § 555.
Posted on: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 20:39:46 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015