Chicago Illinois Jury Instruction - 3.3.1 Section 1, Per Se Violation Conspiracy To Fix Prices - Includes Alternative Rule of Reason Instruction

• Category: Federal - Jury Instructions
• State: Multi-State
• City: Chicago
• Control #: US-11CF-3-3-1
• Format: Word; Rich Text

Description

This form contains sample jury instructions, to be used across the United States. These questions are to be used only as a model, and should be altered to more perfectly fit your own cause of action needs. Chicago Illinois Jury Instruction — 3.3.1 Section 1, Per Se Violation Conspiracy To Fix Prices — Includes Alternative Rule of Reason Instruction is a legal guideline provided to jurors in Chicago, Illinois, when determining whether there has been a violation of antitrust laws related to price-fixing conspiracies. This instruction explains the elements that must be proven by the prosecution to establish a per se violation of conspiracy to fix prices, as well as an alternative instruction that allows for consideration of the rule of reason when evaluating a defendant's conduct. The purpose of this jury instruction is to ensure that jurors understand the specific criteria that must be met in order to hold a defendant liable for engaging in a price-fixing conspiracy. The instruction includes relevant keywords and concepts related to antitrust laws, conspiracy, and the rule of reason. The primary types of Chicago Illinois Jury Instruction — 3.3.1 Section 1, Per Se Violation Conspiracy To Fix Prices — Include: 1. Per Se Violation Instruction: This portion of the instruction informs jurors about the per se violation standard that can be applied in cases involving price-fixing conspiracies. Jurors are instructed that if the prosecution proves certain elements, such as an agreement or understanding between competitors to fix prices, they may find the defendant guilty without further analysis. 2. Alternative Rule of Reason Instruction: This part of the instruction presents an alternative approach to evaluating the defendant's conduct. It informs jurors that instead of applying the per se violation standard, they may also consider the rule of reason. Under the rule of reason, jurors assess whether the defendant's behavior unreasonably restrained trade or competition, considering factors such as its pro-competitive justifications and potential anti-competitive effects. Overall, this jury instruction provides jurors with a framework for evaluating the evidence and making a determination on whether a defendant is guilty of a per se violation of conspiracy to fix prices or if an alternative rule of reason analysis should be applied. It serves as a crucial tool in ensuring a fair and informed decision-making process in antitrust cases.

Chicago Illinois Jury Instruction — 3.3.1 Section 1, Per Se Violation Conspiracy To Fix Prices — Includes Alternative Rule of Reason Instruction is a legal guideline provided to jurors in Chicago, Illinois, when determining whether there has been a violation of antitrust laws related to price-fixing conspiracies. This instruction explains the elements that must be proven by the prosecution to establish a per se violation of conspiracy to fix prices, as well as an alternative instruction that allows for consideration of the rule of reason when evaluating a defendant's conduct. The purpose of this jury instruction is to ensure that jurors understand the specific criteria that must be met in order to hold a defendant liable for engaging in a price-fixing conspiracy. The instruction includes relevant keywords and concepts related to antitrust laws, conspiracy, and the rule of reason. The primary types of Chicago Illinois Jury Instruction — 3.3.1 Section 1, Per Se Violation Conspiracy To Fix Prices — Include: 1. Per Se Violation Instruction: This portion of the instruction informs jurors about the per se violation standard that can be applied in cases involving price-fixing conspiracies. Jurors are instructed that if the prosecution proves certain elements, such as an agreement or understanding between competitors to fix prices, they may find the defendant guilty without further analysis. 2. Alternative Rule of Reason Instruction: This part of the instruction presents an alternative approach to evaluating the defendant's conduct. It informs jurors that instead of applying the per se violation standard, they may also consider the rule of reason. Under the rule of reason, jurors assess whether the defendant's behavior unreasonably restrained trade or competition, considering factors such as its pro-competitive justifications and potential anti-competitive effects. Overall, this jury instruction provides jurors with a framework for evaluating the evidence and making a determination on whether a defendant is guilty of a per se violation of conspiracy to fix prices or if an alternative rule of reason analysis should be applied. It serves as a crucial tool in ensuring a fair and informed decision-making process in antitrust cases.