The end came with a federal court decision in United States v. Motion Picture Patents Co. on October 1, 1915, which ruled that the MPPC's acts went " far beyond what was necessary to protect the use of patents or the monopoly which went with them " and was therefore an illegal restraint of trade under the Sherman Antitrust Act.

* 1911 – In Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States, the United States Supreme Court declares Standard Oil to be an " unreasonable " monopoly under the Sherman Antitrust Act and orders the company to be broken up.

United States v. Microsoft was a set of civil actions filed against Microsoft Corporation pursuant to the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 Sections 1 and 2 on May 18, 1998 by the United States Department of Justice ( DOJ ) and 20 states.

At Apex Hosiery Co. v. Leader :: The legislative history of the Sherman Act, as well as the decisions of this Court interpreting it, show that it was not aimed at policing interstate transportation or movement of goods and property.

The addition of the words " or commerce among the several States " was not an additional kind of restraint to be prohibited by the Sherman Act, but was the means used to relate the prohibited restraint of trade to interstate commerce for constitutional purposes, Atlantic Cleaners & Dyers v. United States, 286 U. S. 427, 286 U. S. 434, so that Congress, through its commerce power, might suppress and penalize restraints on the competitive system which involved or affected interstate commerce.

In 1911 the Supreme Court agreed that in recent years ( 1900 – 1904 ) Standard had violated the Sherman Act ( see Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States ).

In State Oil Co. v Khan, the US Supreme Court held that vertical price fixing is no longer considered a per se violation of the Sherman Act, but horizontal price fixing is still considered a breach of the Sherman Act.

Also in 2008, the defendants of United States v LG Display Co., United States v. Chunghwa Picture Tubes, and United States v. Sharp Corporation heard in the Northern District of California, agreed to pay a total sum of $ 585 million to settle their prosecutions for conspiring to fix prices of liquid crystal display panels, which was the second largest amount awarded under the Sherman Act in history.

The City of Sherman was a party in a notable Texas Supreme Court case, City of Sherman v. Henry, 928 S. W. 2d 464 ( Tex.

In September 2005, U. S. District Judge James Ware approved Slattery v. Apple Computer Inc. to proceed with monopoly charges against Apple in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

* 27 July — John Sherman makes his final first-class appearance for Manchester v. Sheffield at Hyde Park, Sheffield.

This resulted in a landmark federal lawsuit, Federal Baseball Club v. National League, in which the U. S. Supreme Court ultimately ruled that the Sherman Antitrust Act did not apply to Major League Baseball.

In 1922, the Supreme Court ruled in Federal Baseball Club v. National League ( brought by the Terrapins, one of the teams which had not been bought out ), that Major League Baseball and its constituent leagues were primarily entertainment, not conventional interstate commerce, and thus were exempt from the Sherman Antitrust Act.

See, also, Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U. S. 658 ( 1978 ) (" here was ample support for Blair's view that the Sherman Amendment, by putting municipalities to the Hobson's choice of keeping the peace or paying civil damages, attempted to impose obligations on municipalities by indirection that could not be imposed directly, thereby threatening to ' destroy the government of the states '").

In Leegin Creative Leather Prods., Inc. v. PSKS, Inc., 127 S. Ct. 2705 ( 2007 ), the Supreme Court considered whether federal antitrust law established a per se ban on minimum resale price agreements and, instead, allow resale price maintenance agreements to be judged by the rule of reason, the usual standard applied to determine if there is a violation of section 1 of the Sherman Act.

Harlan's partial dissent in the 1911 Standard Oil anti-trust decision ( Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States, 221 U. S. 1 ) penetratingly addressed issues of statutory construction reaching beyond the Sherman Anti-Trust Act itself.

" However, he later disappointed Roosevelt by dissenting in Northern Securities Co. v. United States, a major antitrust prosecution ; the majority of the court, however, did rule against Holmes and sided with Theodore Roosevelt's belief that Northern Securities violated the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.

These scholars argue that much language in Trans-Missouri Freight was dicta, and also emphasized the Court's decision in United States v. Joint Traffic Association, 171 U. S. 505 ( 1898 ), in which the Court announced that " ordinary contracts and combinations " did not offend the Sherman Act, because they merely restrained trade " indirectly.

Federal Baseball Club v. National League,, is a case in which the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that the Sherman Antitrust Act did not apply to Major League Baseball.

On May 9, 1911, the United States Supreme Court ruled in United States v. American Tobacco Co. that the Duke trust, ATC, was indeed a monopoly and was in violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890.

Sherman was responsible for the story when he said in his memoirs that this was the only time he could recall seeing Thomas ride so fast.

That night a note written in Slocum's hand and dated from inside the captured city came to Sherman stating that the Twentieth Corps was in possession of Atlanta.

Before making the news public Sherman sent an officer with the note to Thomas.

The next day Sherman issued his orders ending the campaign and pulled his armies back to Atlanta.

Sherman laid great store by place captures.

Sherman felt that his own part in the campaign was skillful and well executed but that the slowness of a part of his army robbed him of the larger fruits of victory.

In the midst of this gloom, at 10:05 P.M. on September 2, Slocum's telegram to Stanton, `` General Sherman has taken Atlanta '', shattered the talk of a negotiated peace and boosted Lincoln into the White House.

Official congratulations showered upon Sherman and his army.

Sherman had accomplished this much of his job and then inexplicably nullified it by his thirty-mile retreat from Lovejoy's to Atlanta.

Sherman proved that a railway base could be movable and the most brilliant feature of the Atlanta campaign was the rapid repair of the tracks.

To the Rebels it seemed as if Sherman carried tunnels and bridges in his pockets.

Sherman could never be accused of sticking too long with the old.

So Sherman tried a compromise.

Sherman knew the uses of cavalry as well as Thomas but he imagined a moving base with infantry wings instead of cavalry wings.

Sherman insisted that cavalry could not successfully break up hostile railways, yet Garrard's Covington raid and Rousseau's Opelika raid cut two-thirds of the rail lines he had to break and Sherman lived in mortal fear of what Forrest might do to his communications.

From the night of August 30 to the morning of September 2 there was no Union cavalry east of the Macon railway to disclose to Sherman that he was missing the greatest opportunity of his career.

Johnston believed that Sherman put his naked engineers into the swimming parties to locate the various fords.

This claim, as submitted to the District Court and dismissed by it, 126 F.Supp.235, alleged violation not only of 7 of the Clayton Act, but also of 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act.

However, this Court put to one side without consideration the Government's appeal from the dismissal of its Sherman Act allegations.

Rep. Charles E. Hughes of Sherman, sponsor of the bill, said a failure to enact it would amount `` to making a gift out of the taxpayers' pockets to banks, insurance and pipeline companies ''.

His contention was denied by several bankers, including Scott Hudson of Sherman, Gaynor B. Jones of Houston, J. B. Brady of Harlingen and Howard Cox of Austin.

Mrs. John C. Vroman Jr. of Manzanola is spending several days in her Sherman Plaza apartment.

Later, Huff cashed three checks for $100 each at the Sherman House, using a credit card.

More than 10 companies maintain facilities in Dallas and one large manufacturer is located to the north at Sherman.