Supreme Court of the United States
St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Barry
June 29, 1978438 U.S. 531
Summary
The Court held that the "boycott" exception in § 3(b) of the McCarran‑Ferguson Act applies to the insurers’ concerted refusal to deal with policyholders, so the antitrust claim is not barred. It reasoned that the term "boycott" carries its ordinary Sherman Act meaning and that the conduct alleged fits that definition. The Court also rejected the defendants’ mootness argument. Justice Stewart, dissenting, argued that § 3(b) should be read narrowly and would have reversed.
Holding
- Whether the "boycott" exception in § 3(b) of the McCarran‑Ferguson Act applies to disputes between insurers and policyholders.. Yes; the exception applies, so the antitrust claim is not pre‑empted.
- Whether the conduct alleged constitutes a "boycott" within the ordinary meaning of the term.. The insurers' concerted refusal to deal with policyholders is a boycott.
- Whether the case is moot after the formation of Rhode Island's Joint Underwriting Association.. The case is not moot; the alleged conduct could recur and the JUA does not extinguish the plaintiffs' claims.
Docket 77-240
Cited authorities
- 15 U.S.C. § 1013
- 26 Stat. 209
- 15 U.S.C. § 1
- 59 Stat. 33
- 15 U.S.C. § 1013
- 59 Stat. 34
- 61 Stat. 448
- 15 U.S.C. §§ 1012