Timberlane Lumber Co v Bank of America 549 F2nd 597 (1976)

Timberlane alleged that officials of the Bank of America in US and Honduras conspired to prevent Timberlane, through its Honduras subsidiaries from milling lumber in Honduras and exporting it to US, in violation of Sherman Act, thus maintaining the lumber export business in Honduras in the hands of a few selected individuals financed and controlled by the Bank The defendants asked the District Court to dismiss the action, it was granted, since it was not direct and substantial effect in the US. Timberlane appealed the decision

1. Does the alleged restrain affected or was intended to affect the foreign commerce of the US? The Sherman act is not limited to trade restrains with have both a direct and substantial effect on our foreign commerce 2. It is such a type and magnitude so as to be cognisable as violation of the Sherman Act? The effect alleged would appear to be sufficient to state a claim 3. As a matter of international comity and fairness, should the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the US be asserted to cover it? Most of the activity took place in Honduras, most direct effect was probably in Honduras; however there has been no indication of any conflict with the law or policy of Honduras government. The dismissal of the court cannot be sustained