Prior to beginning work on this discussion forum, review Chapter 31 in your textbook and use the information to address the following scenario:
Rajah’s RV, Inc., a recreational vehicle (RV) dealer filed an antitrust lawsuit against Big Show, LLC; Springfield Convention Center, Inc; Central Illinois RV Dealers Association (CIRVDA) and several other RV dealers which are competitors in the central Illinois market.
Big Show operates two RV shows each year, one in the spring and one in the fall, at the Illinois State Fairgrounds in Springfield, Illinois. The spring event is one of the largest in the United States and attracts over 60,000 consumers each year. The fall show is smaller, but it still has almost 20,000 people attend.
Rajah’s has participated in the fall show for the past four years and the spring show for the last three. The company has been highly successful at selling RVs at each of the events because it urges customers to shop with other dealers and then return to Rajah’s for a lower price. After this year’s spring show, several competitors began to complain to Big Show about the methods used by Rajah’s. There were also objections made to the Springfield Convention Center and CIRVDA. As a result of these complaints, Big Show informed Rajah’s that after this fall’s event it would no longer be allowed to participate.
Analyze if the decision to exclude Rajah’s from future RV shows would result in a violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. What argument would be used to support Rajah’s position?
Discuss which standard – the per se or the rule of reason – a court would use to analyze this case. Explain why.
Describe any valid legal arguments that the defendants in this case (Big Show, the Springfield Convention Center, CIRVDA, etc.) would have for excluding Rajah’s from the shows.
Assume the court rules for Rajah’s. Discuss if this ruling would be fair or if it would be going too far in protecting the RV market in central Illinois?