In a divestiture suit under the Clayton Act, the Southern District of New York limited the investigation necessary to ascertain a section 7 violation on the basis of reciprocity and brought reciprocal dealing standing apart from an acquisition within the purview of section 1 of the Sherman Act by analogy to tying arrangements. The reasoning and conclusions of the court may give significant impetus to the reciprocity concept as a basis for antitrust regulation with important implications for business expansion by diversification acquisition.
Trade Regulation: District Court Clarifies Test for Conglomerate Merger Violation of Clayton Act,
1967 Duke Law Journal
Available at: http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/dlj/vol16/iss2/7