United States Steel Corp. v. Fortner Enterprises, Inc.
429 U.S. 610 · Decided February 22, 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
United States Steel Corp. v. Fortner Enterprises, Inc. was decided on February 22, 1977 unanimously (9–0). The Court reversed the lower court's decision. Justice John Paul Stevens 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. 610 · 97 S. Ct. 861 · 51 L. Ed. 2d 80 · 1977 U.S. LEXIS 43
- Docket number
- 75-853
- Decided
- February 22, 1977
- Argued
- November 1, 1976
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- John Paul Stevens
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Antitrust
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Legal provision
- Sherman 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 | |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Concurrence | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
Full case caption
United States Steel Corp. et al. v. Fortner Enterprises, Inc.
SCDB identifiers: case 1976-048, docket 1976-048-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Antitrust”
- Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, 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: Sherman Act
- Rice v. Norman Williams Co.
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.
- United Mine Workers of America v. Pennington
- Local Union No. 189 v. Jewel Tea Co., Inc.
- United States v. First National Bank & Trust Co. of Lexington
- Federal Trade Commission v. Superior Court Trial Lawyers Association
Same Term, same area (Economic Activity)
- Boston Stock Exchange v. State Tax CommissionLaw held unconstitutional
- Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, 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