Skip to main content

This Day in Legal History -- Standard Oil of New Jersey v. United States, 221 U.S 1 (1911)


Houston (perhaps) rightly considers itself the home of the oil industry, but the most famous legal case involves a company headquartered in New Jersey. On this date the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in the case of Standard Oil of New Jersey v. United States, 221 U.S. 1 (1911). 

Standard Oil dominated the oil market in the United States and its path to such a lofty place was not without controversy. Ida Tarbell’s scathing investigation of the “Oil Trust” opened many people’s eyes to its tactics and control of the market. It also brought interest from the federal government and its antitrust powers embodied in the Sherman Antitrust Act.  States had tried to reign in Standard Oil, but had failed. New President Theodore Roosevelt felt he could do better, and he succeeded. 

At the time the case was brought the parties believed the case to be one of the most important cases heard by the Supreme Court. US Attorney General George W. Wickersham said of the case, “ never in the history of this country have there been presented to any tribunal controversies in which the issues were more momentous than those in the case against the American Tobacco Company and in the case at bar.” It seemed the fate of capitalism itself was being decided.

Standard Oil lost and its largest stockholder, John D. Rockefeller, became richer than ever. The case is famous for breaking up Standard Oil into a variety of regional oil companies (Amoco, Chevron, Exxon, and Mobil to name the most famous) and giving Rockefeller stock in each. The case spurred the creation of the Federal Trade Commission. Its legal legacy is the adoption of the “rule of reason” (unreasonable restraint of trade was actionable) as a foundation for future antitrust actions and “helped to establish the rules and character of market capitalism in modern America.” The case of Standard Oil of New Jersey vs. United States remains a “powerful and enduring. . .symbol of big business and the extent of its public accountability.”

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Spying and International Law

With increasing numbers of foreign governments officially objecting to now-widely publicized U.S. espionage activities, the topic of the legality of these activities has been raised both by the target governments and by the many news organizations reporting on the issue.For those interested in better understanding this controversy by learning more about international laws concerning espionage, here are some legal resources that may be useful.

The following is a list of multinational treaties relevant to spies and espionage:
Brussels Declaration concerning the Laws and Customs of War (1874).Although never ratified by the nations that drafted it, this declaration is one of the earliest modern examples of an international attempt to codify the laws of war.Articles 19-22 address the identification and treatment of spies during wartime.These articles served mainly to distinguish active spies from soldiers and former spies, and provided no protections for spies captured in the act.The Hagu…

Citing to Vernon's Texas Codes Annotated: Finding Accurate Publication Dates (without touching a book)

When citing to a current statute, both the Bluebook (rule 12.3.2) and Greenbook (rule 10.1.1) require a  practitioner to provide the publication date of the bound volume in which the cited code section appears. For example, let's cite to the codified statute section that prohibits Texans from hunting or selling bats, living or dead. Note, however, you may remove or hunt a bat that is inside or on a building occupied by people. The statute is silent as to Batman, who for his own safety, best stay in Gotham City.
This section of the Texas Parks and Wildlife code is 63.101. "Protection of Bats." After checking the pocket part and finding no updates in the supplement, my citation will be:
Tex. Parks & Wild. Code Ann. § 63.101 (West ___ ). When I look at the statute in my bound volume of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, I can clearly see that the volume's publication date is 2002. But, when I find the same citation on Westlaw or LexisNexis, all I can see is that the …