This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Ps filed suit against D seeking injunctive relief and alleging that D violated the Sherman Act. D had obtained federal funds to help build a sewage treatment facility within the Eau Claire Service Area, that included P; the facility is the only one in the market available to Ps. D has refused to supply sewage treatment services to P. It does supply the services to individual landowners in areas of the Towns if a majority of the individuals in the area vote by referendum election to have their homes annexed by D. Ps alleged they were potential competitors of D and that D used its monopoly over sewage treatment to gain an unlawful monopoly over the provision of sewage collection and transportation services. The Court ruled for D; Wisconsin's statutes regulating the municipal provision of sewage service expressed a clear state policy to replace competition with regulation. The court of appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.