44 Rutgers L. Rev. 101 (1991-1992)
The New Antitrust Paradox: Antitrust Injury

handle is hein.journals/rutlr44 and id is 111 raw text is: THE NEW ANTITRUST PARADOX: ANTITRUST
INJURY
Norman W. Hawker*
In 1978, Judge Robert Bork published The Antitrust Paradox:
A Policy at War with Itself.' Antitrust law had become a para-
dox, argued Judge Bork, because antitrust's basic premises are
mutually incompatible.2 Judge Bork believed that the only le-
gitimate goal of antitrust is the maximization of consumer wel-
fare, but the Supreme Court has introduced conflicting goals
into the law.' Certain of its doctrines preserve competition,
while others suppress it, resulting in a policy at war with itself.
While the Supreme Court has adopted much of Judge Bork's
thinking, it has also created a new antitrust paradox by requiring
that a plaintiff must suffer a special type of loss-antitrust in-
jury-to obtain recovery under the private enforcement provi-
sions of antitrust laws.
The Supreme Court's treatment of agreements between manu-
facturers and their dealers to fix the maximum price the dealer
can charge (maximum resale price maintenance) exemplifies
the new antitrust paradox. In Albrecht v. Herald Co.,5 the Su-
preme Court recognized that agreements to fix maximum prices,
'no less than those to fix minimum prices, cripple the freedom of
traders and thereby restrain their ability to sell in accordance
with their own judgment.' 6 Consistent with this view, the Su-
preme Court held that section one of the Sherman Act7 prohib-
ited a newspaper publisher and its dealers from fixing the news-
* 0 1991 by Norman W. Hawker.
Visiting Professor of Law, Thomas M. Cooley Law School. B.B.A., 1981; J.D., 1985, Uni-
versity of Michigan. The author wishes to thank the participants at a faculty forum at the
University of Toledo College of Law for their helpful comments on the initial draft of this
article.
1. R.H. BORK, THE ANTITRUST PARADox: A POLICY AT WAR WITH ITSELF (1978).
2. Id. at 7.
3. Id.
4. Id.
5. 390 U.S. 145 (1968).
6. Id. at 152 (quoting Kiefer-Stewart Co. v. Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc., 340 U.S.
211, 213 (1951)).
7. 15 U.S.C.  1 (1988).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 2,700 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Access to this content requires a subscription. Please visit the following page to request a quote or trial:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?