Pillsbury Co. v. FTC

354 F.2d 952 (5th Cir. 1966)


P purchased the assets of Ballard & Ballard and began operating Ballard's business as part of its own organization. P acquired Duff's assets, including a 5-year-old baking mix plant. P and Ballard milled, manufactured, and sold a full line of wheat flour products. Specifically, both companies produced 'family flour' (sold for home use), 'bakery flour' (sold for use by bakeries), 'flour-base mixes' (labor-saving preparations such as cake mixes, pancake mixes, etc.), and 'formula feed' (for animal consumption). Duff was only in the flour-based mix business. Both P and Duff did business on a nationwide basis; therefore, it was charged that injury to competition in the flour base mix industry throughout the United States occurred as a result of P's acquisition of Duff. D found that the acquisitions violated the Act since the probable effect would be 'substantially to lessen competition' in the described fields of industry. It further ordered divestiture of the acquired businesses. During D's hearings with P, Chairman Howrey appeared before the Senate subcommittee who was grilled extremely hard on the P hearings. This case or P's name was referred to more than 100 times during the several hearings. The questions were so probing that Mr. Howrey, the chairman of the Commission, announced to chairman Kefauver of the subcommittee that he would have to disqualify himself from further participation in the P case. P sought review