Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 06 JULY 2012

Judge Easterbrook On Section 8 Director Interlocks And Antitrust Injury

Jones Day
Jones Day
Contributor
Jones Day

Jones Day

Jones Day is a global law firm with more than 2,400 lawyers in 40 offices across five continents....

View firm profile
Explore more from Jones Day

In the Section 8 context, this focus on antitrust injury should lower the risk of future derivative actions being brought to challenge direct interlocks.

United StatesAntitrust/Competition Law

Although Section 8 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 19, which prohibits competing corporations from sharing directors or officers, is an important concern for the business community, the statute has received surprisingly little attention from government enforcers or judicial opinions in recent years.  Therefore, when two of the leading antitrust voices on the federal bench – Judges Easterbrook and Posner of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit – offer a perspective on Section 8, it is worth noting.

On June 13, 2012, in a unanimous opinion authored by Judge Easterbrook (joined by Judges Posner and Bauer), the Seventh Circuit reversed and remanded with instructions to enter judgment for defendants a shareholders' derivative suit alleging that Sears Roebuck & Co. violated Section 8 by having on its Board of Directors two individuals who also served on the boards of Sears competitors.  Robert F. Booth v. Crowley, No. 10-3285 (7th Cir. June 13, 2012) 

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from