When we last checked in on In re SSA Bonds Antitrust Litigation, 16-cv-3711 (SDNY), we focused on Judge Ramos’ granting the Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim because Plaintiffs failed to allege injury-in-fact sufficient to establish antitrust standing. Now, Plaintiffs have re-pled their claims and several Defendants... Read more »
Blogs
Posts Categorized: Antitrust
Antitrust Violation Defense to Contract Claim Only if Contract Memorializes the Violation
On September 20, 2016, Justice Oing of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Time Warner Cable Enterprises LLC v. Universal Communications Network, Inc., 2016 NY Slip Op. 31756(U), holding that an antitrust violation is a defense to a breach of contract claim only if the contract memorializes the violation, explaining: The... Read more »
Client Q&A: Two of my competitors seem to have decided to work together to force me out of the market. Can they do that?
Two of my competitors seem to have decided to work together to force me out of the market. Can they do that? By Erik S. Groothuis. The short answer is that two or more competitors cannot coordinate to force a third out of the market. If you suspect that has happened, you may have an... Read more »
Court Declines to Dismiss Donnelly Act Claims
On March 31, 2015, Justice Friedman of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Williams v. Barclays Capital, Inc., 2015 NY Slip Op. 30466(U), refusing to dismiss a Donnelly Act claim. In Williams, the plaintiff alleged that the defendant “engaged in a conspiracy with investment banks and others not to” use the... Read more »
Fourth Department Analyzes Standard for Donnelly Act Claim
On February 13, 2015, the Fourth Department issued a decision in Radon Corp. of America, Inc. v. National Radon Safety Board, 2015 NY Slip Op. 01365, discussing the standard for a Donnelly Act claim. In Radon Corp. of America, the Fourth Department reversed a trial court’s grant of summary judgment to a defendant on a... Read more »
Judge Garaufis Denies Defendants’ Summary Judgment Motion In Government’s Antitrust Case Against American Express Based On Government’s Theories Concerning The Significance Of Undisputed Facts
In a May 7, 2014 order in United States v. American Express Co, No. 10-CV-4496 (NGG) (RER), Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis denied summary judgment to defendant American Express in the government’s antitrust action against Amex arising out of the company’s “anti-steering” rules. These rules impose certain restrictions on merchants that accept American Express cards, which,... Read more »