## Facts

- Calvert Distillers Corp. and Seagram Distillers Corp. distributed branded liquor in interstate commerce through Louisiana wholesalers to retail sellers.
- The distributors used resale price maintenance contracts requiring signing retailers to sell at or above scheduled minimum retail prices.
- More than 100 Louisiana retailers signed such agreements, but Schwegmann Bros., a New Orleans grocer, refused to sign and sold the liquor below the scheduled prices.
- The distributors sued in federal court (diversity jurisdiction) seeking to enjoin Schwegmann from selling below the scheduled minimum prices, relying on Louisiana’s Fair Trade law and the Miller-Tydings amendment to § 1 of the Sherman Act.
- The district court enjoined Schwegmann from selling below the minimum prices; the Fifth Circuit affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether the Miller-Tydings Act’s exemption for “contracts or agreements” setting minimum resale prices permits enforcing a state fair-trade “nonsigner” provision against a retailer that never agreed to the price schedule.
2. Whether, absent a qualifying federal exemption, an interstate minimum resale price scheme remains unlawful per se under § 1 of the Sherman Act.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed.
- The Miller-Tydings Act did not authorize enjoining Schwegmann, a nonsigning retailer, from selling below the scheduled minimum prices.
- The statutory exemption was limited to voluntary “contracts or agreements” prescribing minimum resale prices, not restraints imposed on noncontracting retailers.

## Legal Principles

- Minimum price fixing is unlawful per se under § 1 of the Sherman Act unless Congress clearly provides an exemption.
- Statutory exceptions to the Sherman Act are construed narrowly.
- The Miller-Tydings Act protects only minimum resale price provisions contained in lawful contracts or agreements; it does not extend antitrust immunity to enforcing those prices against nonsigners under state law.

## Conclusion

The Court held that the Miller-Tydings amendment legalized only voluntary resale price maintenance contracts lawful under state law and did not permit manufacturers or distributors to use state “nonsigner” clauses to bind retailers that never agreed to minimum resale prices; the injunction against Schwegmann was therefore improper.


Schwegmann Bros. v. Calvert Distillers Corp., 341 U.S. 384 (1951)