Elizabeth K. Dorminey authored another article for the Federalist Society. Here's a quick summary of what this article, Franchise With That? McDonald’s No-Poach Agreements Receive Antitrust Scrutiny, is about.
Antitrust cases usually come up in the consumer products context, where suppliers of goods are accused of anticompetitive behavior like price-fixing or tying agreements. Take the case that the Department of Justice just filed against Apple, or (more fun) one brought by California consumers desiring to purchase the iconic Hermes Birkin handbag (at $10,000 a pop, or more for exotic leathers). The shoppers filed a class action challenging the boutique’s alleged practice of limiting access to the prestige accessory by requiring would-be Birkin-bag-buyers to first pony up with purchases of scarves, shoes, and so forth: an alleged “tying” scheme in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.
Related Content
US DOL Finalizes Rule to Increase Compensation Thresholds for Overtime Eligibility
Featured Federalist Article: Text Education in Muldrow v. St. Louis: The Supreme Court Just Made Title VII Cases Easier for Plaintiffs to Win
Judge Invalidates Joint Employer Rule, and Independent Contractor Rule Takes Effect
The Importance of Fairness in Employment to the Law and to Job Satisfaction
Major Employers Challenge Constitutionality of Labor Act
