Car Carriers, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.

How later courts describe this case

• holding that to prove a Rule of Reason violation under section 1 of the Sherman Act, a plaintiff must allege an anticompetitive effect
• reversing award of damages where defendant’s proposed jury instruction failed to accurately state controlling legal principle and defendant failed to raise issue about the correct legal principle on appeal
• "Although juries are ... accorded great discretion in determining the amount of damage awards, damages must be proved; they must not be speculative.”
• "Thus, the plaintiff must allege, not only an injury to himself, but an injury to the market as well."
• “[i]t is axiomatic that the complaint may not be amended by the briefs in opposition to a motion to dismiss”
• complaint may not be amended by the opposition briefs; on a motion to dismiss, consideration is limited to the pleadings
• it is “axiomatic that the complaint may not be amended by the briefs in opposition to a motion to dismiss.”
• complaint may not be amended by briefs in opposition to a motion to dismiss