UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
EASTERN DISCTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF STILWELL, OKLAHOMA,
et al.,
Defendant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Case No. CIV 96-196 B |
UNITED STATES' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The United States hereby moves for summary judgment that defendants
have violated sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. §§
1 & 2) by refusing to provide sewer and water to any customer who
bought electricity from their competitor. As set forth more fully in
the attached memorandum in support of the motion, summary judgment under
section 1 is appropriate here because (1) defendants have conceded that
they conditioned the provision of sewer and water on the purchase of
electricity from them and (2) such conduct is a per se violation
of the antitrust laws (i.e., it is illegal without any analysis
of the justification for or the effects of the conduct). Summary judgment
is also appropriate under section 2 where defendants monopolized the
sale of electricity in the annexed portions of the City of Stilwell
by this refusal to provide sewer or water unless the customer agreed
to buy electricity from them. Because the relevant conduct is conceded,
a trial would be a needless use of scarce judicial resources and the
court should grant the summary judgment motion.
|
_______________________________
JOHN R. READ
MICHELE B. CANO
United States Department of Justice
Antitrust Division
Transportation, Energy & Agriculture Section
325 Seventh Street, N.W., Suite 500
Washington, D.C. 20530
(202) 307-0468 |
November 12, 1997
|