United States v. Von's Grocery Co.
E530385
United States v. Von's Grocery Co. is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court antitrust case that struck down a supermarket merger for allegedly increasing market concentration, later criticized as an overreach in merger enforcement.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| United States v. Von's Grocery Co. canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T5539331 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: United States v. Von's Grocery Co. Context triple: [The Antitrust Paradox, criticizes, United States v. Von's Grocery Co.]
-
A.
Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States
Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States is a 1935 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down key provisions of the New Deal by limiting federal power under the Commerce Clause and declaring the National Industrial Recovery Act unconstitutional.
-
B.
United States v. Darby
United States v. Darby is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal labor regulations under the Commerce Clause and marked a broad expansion of federal power over economic activity.
-
C.
United States v. Harry F. Sinclair
United States v. Harry F. Sinclair was a landmark criminal case arising from the Teapot Dome scandal, in which oil magnate Harry F. Sinclair was prosecuted for contempt of Congress and jury tampering related to corrupt federal oil lease contracts in the 1920s.
-
D.
International Shoe Co. v. Washington
International Shoe Co. v. Washington is a landmark 1945 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the modern "minimum contacts" standard for determining when a state may exercise personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant.
-
E.
Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio
Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowed the standards for proving employment discrimination under Title VII, prompting Congress to later revise those standards in the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: United States v. Von's Grocery Co. Target entity description: United States v. Von's Grocery Co. is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court antitrust case that struck down a supermarket merger for allegedly increasing market concentration, later criticized as an overreach in merger enforcement.
-
A.
Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States
Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States is a 1935 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down key provisions of the New Deal by limiting federal power under the Commerce Clause and declaring the National Industrial Recovery Act unconstitutional.
-
B.
United States v. Darby
United States v. Darby is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal labor regulations under the Commerce Clause and marked a broad expansion of federal power over economic activity.
-
C.
United States v. Harry F. Sinclair
United States v. Harry F. Sinclair was a landmark criminal case arising from the Teapot Dome scandal, in which oil magnate Harry F. Sinclair was prosecuted for contempt of Congress and jury tampering related to corrupt federal oil lease contracts in the 1920s.
-
D.
International Shoe Co. v. Washington
International Shoe Co. v. Washington is a landmark 1945 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the modern "minimum contacts" standard for determining when a state may exercise personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant.
-
E.
Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio
Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowed the standards for proving employment discrimination under Title VII, prompting Congress to later revise those standards in the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (39)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
U.S. Supreme Court case
ⓘ
antitrust case ⓘ |
| caseType | civil enforcement action ⓘ |
| chiefJusticeAtTime | Earl Warren ⓘ |
| citation | 384 U.S. 270 ⓘ |
| country |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1966 ⓘ |
| defendant |
Shopping Bag Food Stores
ⓘ
Von's Grocery Company ⓘ |
| enforcementAgency | U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division ⓘ |
| era |
Warren Court
ⓘ
linked to:
Warren Court era
|
| holding |
the merger was unlawful because it might substantially lessen competition
ⓘ
the supermarket merger violated Section 7 of the Clayton Act ⓘ |
| impact | influenced 1960s merger enforcement policy ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | United States federal law ⓘ |
| languageOfProceeding | English ⓘ |
| laterCriticism |
criticized as overreach in merger enforcement
ⓘ
criticized for focusing on concentration trends rather than competitive effects ⓘ |
| legalArea |
antitrust law
ⓘ
competition law ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
Section 7 of the Clayton Act
ⓘ
linked to:
Clayton Act provisions
market concentration ⓘ merger enforcement ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy |
Justice Hugo Black
ⓘ
linked to:
Hugo L. Black
|
| market | Los Angeles grocery retail market ⓘ |
| outcome | merger struck down ⓘ |
| plaintiff |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| precedentFor | strict structural approach to merger analysis ⓘ |
| reasoning | trend toward concentration in the grocery market justified blocking the merger ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Brown Shoe Co. v. United States
ⓘ
United States v. Philadelphia National Bank ⓘ |
| relatedConcept |
incipiency standard under Section 7
ⓘ
structural presumption in merger law ⓘ |
| statuteInterpreted |
Clayton Act
ⓘ
linked to:
Clayton Act provisions
Section 7 of the Clayton Act ⓘ
linked to:
Clayton Act provisions
|
| subjectMatter | supermarket merger ⓘ |
| subsequentTreatment | narrowed by later, more effects-based merger decisions ⓘ |
| vote | 6–2 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: United States v. Von's Grocery Co. Description of subject: United States v. Von's Grocery Co. is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court antitrust case that struck down a supermarket merger for allegedly increasing market concentration, later criticized as an overreach in merger enforcement.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.