The Federal Trade Commission V. Brown Shoe Company

IN 1956, Brown Shoe Co. acquired the G. R. Kinney Co. The acquisition was challenged by the Department of Justice and found illegal by the Supreme Court.' The trial also disclosed Brown's distribution arrangements with a group of independent retailers (called Brown's franchise dealers). It was in part the information uncovered in the merger case that led the Federal Trade Commission (the FTC) to challenge Brown's arrangements with its franchise dealers.2 The proceedings were initiated more than 35 years after Brown began to distribute to franchise dealers. Brown appealed the FTC's decision and the Court of Appeals reversed.3 But the Supreme Court ultimately upheld the FTC.4 Before its case against Brown, the FTC had initiated proceedings against International Shoe Co.'s (now Interco's) distribution arrangements with a group of independent shoe retailers. These arrangements were very similar to those of Brown's. The case against Interco was settled by consent decree (in 1958).s But in 1967, after the Supreme Court upheld the FTC's decision