Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc.
429 U.S. 477 · Decided January 25, 1977 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc. was decided on January 25, 1977 unanimously (9–0). The Court vacated the lower court's decision and remanded the case. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Antitrust” in the Economic Activity area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 429 U.S. 477 · 97 S. Ct. 690 · 50 L. Ed. 2d 701 · 1977 U.S. LEXIS 37
- Docket number
- 75-904
- Decided
- January 25, 1977
- Argued
- November 3, 1976
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- Thurgood Marshall
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Antitrust
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Legal provision
- Clayton Act
- Type of law
- Federal statute
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority |
Full case caption
Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc., et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1976-041, docket 1976-041-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Antitrust”
- United States Steel Corp. v. Fortner Enterprises, Inc.
- Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois
- Continental T.V., Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc.Altered precedent
- Vendo Co. v. Lektro-Vend Corp.
- Cantor v. Detroit Edison Co.
- Hospital Building Co. v. Trustees of Rex Hospital
Cases on the same legal provision: Clayton Act
- United States v. American Building Maintenance Industries
- United States v. ITT Continental Baking Co.
- United States v. Marine Bancorporation, Inc.
- United States v. Connecticut National Bank
- United States v. General Dynamics Corp.
- United States v. Falstaff Brewing Corp.
Same Term, same area (Economic Activity)
- Boston Stock Exchange v. State Tax CommissionLaw held unconstitutional
- United States Steel Corp. v. Fortner Enterprises, Inc.
- Piper v. Chris-Craft Industries, Inc.
- E. I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Train
- City of Philadelphia v. New Jersey
- Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. BradyAltered precedent
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error