October Term 2005 · Docket 04-805
Does a joint venture price agreement violate the Sherman Act?
Texaco and Shell argue their joint venture pricing is legal. Dagher claims it is an illegal price-fixing agreement.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Nager argued the lower court erred in finding a per se violation. He cited stipulated facts to support his position.
Mr. Minear argued the pricing agreement is not a per se violation. He provided two specific reasons for this legal conclusion.
Mr. Alioto answered Justice Souter's question about price-fixing intent. He stated the companies did not advise they would fix prices.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 3-9 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 3-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 49-3 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 49-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 19-29 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 19-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 47-9 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 47-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 23-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-37 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-3 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 33-21 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 33-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 9-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-43 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 7-11 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 7-11
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests whether two companies can set prices for a joint venture without breaking antitrust law. The lower court found a per se violation. Texaco and Shell seek reversal. Dagher seeks affirmation.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 23-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-37 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 33-21 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 33-21
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 10, 2006.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 37-39
What each side wants
Texaco and Shell want the Court to reverse the lower court decision. They argue their joint venture pricing is lawful.
Dagher wants the Court to affirm the lower court decision. He argues the pricing agreement is an illegal per se violation.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 23-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-37 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 33-21 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 33-21
What each side says
Texaco and Shell argue the joint venture pricing is not a per se violation. They claim the agreement is lawful under the rule of reason.
Dagher argues the pricing agreement is a per se violation. He claims the companies acted as a single entity to fix prices.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 23-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-37 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 33-21 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 33-21
What the justices asked
Justice Souter asked if a document exists that proves the pricing agreement.
Justice Breyer asked for specific citations regarding price-setting authority in the joint venture agreement.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 3-9 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 3-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 49-3 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 49-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 19-29 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 19-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 47-9 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 47-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-3 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 9-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-43 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 7-11 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 7-11
Why it matters
This case defines the legal limits of joint venture pricing. It determines whether competitors can coordinate prices through a shared business structure. The outcome shapes antitrust enforcement for collaborative business models.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 23-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-37 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 33-21 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 33-21
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 3-9 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 3-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 49-3 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 49-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 19-29 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 19-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 47-9 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 47-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-3 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 9-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-43 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 7-11 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 7-11
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 23-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-37 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 33-21 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 33-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 23-45 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 23-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-37 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 33-21 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 33-21
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.