The Modernization Commission's Approach To Illinois Brick and Indirect Purchaser Litigation Conference on International Cartels September 8, 2006 Jonathan.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Requirements for Bringing Suit Cause of Action -- legally recognized harm Jurisdiction -- right court -- need both: –Subject Matter Jurisdiction and –Personal.
Advertisements

Dispute Resolution Under the Congressional Accountability Act
Legal Research & Writing LAW-215
Constitutional Law Part 4: The Federal Judicial Power
Constitutional Law Part 4: The Federal Judicial Power Lecture 2: Congressional Limits.
The Process of Litigation. What is the first stage in a civil lawsuit ?  Service of Process (the summons)
1 Agenda for 3rd Class Misc. –Nameplates out –Audio recordings –Model answers Finish up Service of Process Introduction to Motion to Dismiss Haddle History.
A. JUDICIAL REGULATION AND THE DOCTRINE OF INHERENT POWER SUCCESSION OF WALLACE, p. 42  what is the issue, and how did it arise?  when a will names an.
Advanced Civil Litigation Class 4Slide 1 The Complaint: General Points The Purpose of the complaint under the federal system and many state systems is.
© 2007 Prentice Hall, Business Law, sixth edition, Henry R. Cheeseman Chapter 3 Litigation and Alternative Dispute Resolution Chapter 3 Litigation and.
Alternative, Judicial, and E-Dispute Resolution
The Court System.  Judge: decide all legal issues in a lawsuit. If no jury, the judge’s job also includes determining the facts of the case.  Plaintiff.
Prof. Washington Civ. Pro. Spr. 06 PLEADINGS. PLEADINGS The pleading stage of litigation involves the complaint, the answer and pre-answer motions The.
1 After Wooley The Bonvillian Cases. 2 Bonvillian v. Dep't of Insurance, 906 So.2d 596 (La.App. Cir ) What is the underlying dispute? Insurance.
Slides developed by Les Wiletzky Wiletzky and Associates Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Prentice-Hall. All rights reserved. Traditional, Alternative, and.
ANTITRUST & TRADE REGULATION SEMINAR Santa Fe July A Legal Framework For Indirect Purchaser Class Actions Why Understanding the Economics of Pass-Through.
December 9, WHY?  1 st Call: September 2003  2 nd Call: January 13, 2011  Hearing: May 1, MONTHS.
Characterization. substance/procedure Grant v McAuliffe (Cal. 1953)
Grant v McAuliffe (Cal 1953). P ships goods in Mass using D as transport P received printed bill of lading which contains limitations on liability Under.
1 Chapter 51 Liability of Accountants and Other Professionals.
1 Streamlined Sales Tax Governing Board. The Marketplace Fairness Act of 2015(MFA) Grants state and local jurisdictions the right to require the collection.
THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT OF BUSINESS A Critical Thinking Approach Fourth Edition Nancy K. Kubasek Bartley A. Brennan M. Neil Browne Nancy K. Kubasek Bartley.
1 Agenda for 22nd Class Admin – Handouts – Name plates Review of fee shifting Intro to 2 nd half of class Joinder Intro to class actions Midsemester feedback.
CHARTERERS’ DEFAULT: Security and Discovery in the U.S. By Charlotte Valentin.
LAW for Business and Personal Use © 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible.
Civil litigation begins with pleadings: formal papers filed with the court by the plaintiff and defendant. Plaintiff - the person bringing the lawsuit.
Recent Competition Law Developments in the United States and Canada Sandeep Vaheesan Special Counsel American Antitrust Institute November 19, 2013.
The Paralegal Professional Chapter Six The Court System.
Chapter 4 Alternative, Judicial, and E- Dispute Resolution.
4-1 Chapter 4— Litigation REED SHEDD PAGNATTARO MOREHEAD F I F T E E N T H E D I T I O N McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2010 by The McGraw-Hill Companies,
Introduction to Legal Process in the United States
The American Court System Chapter 3. Why Study Law And Court System? Manager Needs Understanding Managers Involved In Court Cases As Party As Witness.
Chapter 3 Judicial, Alternative, and E-Dispute Resolution
COPYRIGHT LAW 2003 Professor Fischer CLASS of April THE LAST CLASS!!!
Chapter 16.1 Civil Cases. Types of Civil Lawsuits In civil cases the plaintiff – the party bringing the lawsuit – claims to have suffered a loss and usually.
1 Overview of Legal Process in IP Cases From notes by Steve Baron © Ed Lamoureux/Steve Baron.
Summary Judgment and Summary Adjudication LA 310.
Kaplan University - Adjunct Professor Brian Tippens, J.D. - June 04, Chapter 9 Accountability through Reviewability.
Judge Sarah S. Vance, Eastern District of Louisiana Establishing Damages Under U.S. Antitrust Law.
Recent Developments In Group Actions in the United States Elizabeth Cabraser Sara Gourley Luanne Sacks John Sherk March 2, 2006.
Class Action Lawsuits Law Class WHAT IS A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT? A Class Action is a civil lawsuit brought on behalf of many people who have.
Mon. Nov ) are people already adversaries? NO 2) does the cause of action concern the same t/o of an action already being litigated? NO forbidden.
Tues., Oct. 29. consolidation separate trials counterclaims.
Primary Changes To The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Effective December 1, 2015 Presented By Shuman, McCuskey, & Slicer, PLLC.
Legislative Agenda Part 1 Austin Constitution Meetup Presentation by Jon Roland January 15, 2009.
Civil Procedure 2005 Class 31: Subject Matter Jurisdiction: Supplemental Jurisdiction II, Removal Nov. 2, 2005.
CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 17 Professor Fischer Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America October 4, 2002.
Thurs. Jan. 28. characterization Haumschild v Continental Cas Co. (Wisc. 1959)
Building Industry Authority Determination 2003/3 Commentary Paul Clements.
Tues. 2/2/16. characterization substance/procedure.
Published by Flat World Knowledge, Inc. © 2014 by Flat World Knowledge, Inc. All rights reserved. Your use of this work is subject to the License Agreement.
PANELISTS ROB FISHER BRIAN MACDONOUGH MIKE BIRCH, MODERATOR Representing Clients Before the MCAD in Employment Discrimination Cases.
THE PARALEGAL PROFESSIONAL PA101 Unit 3 Seminar. Discussion Board Tips Most units have more than 1 DB assignment - posting to each DB assignment is required.
Chapter 3 The U.S. Legal System Chapter 3: The U.S. Legal System
Introduction to Environmental Law
Negligence Defenses.
Chapter 42 Liability of Accountants & Other Professionals
Pretrial Conference After discovery, a pretrial hearing is held to clarify the issues, consider a settlement, and set rules for trial Once the trial court.
Conflict of Laws M1 – Class 4.
Mon. Nov. 5.
Regulatory Enforcement & Citizen Suits in the New Administration
Judicial, Administrative, Alternative, and Online Dispute Resolution
Civil Trial Procedures
CALIFORNIA CIVIL LITIGATION INTRODUCTION TO PLEADINGS
ANNUAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT SEMINARO
Chapter 6 Powers and Functions of Administrative Agencies.
Chapter 3 Judicial, Alternative, and E-Dispute Resolution
Chapter 16.1 Civil Cases.
Mon., Oct. 28.
Calculation of Damages in Korean Patent Litigation
Presentation transcript:

The Modernization Commission's Approach To Illinois Brick and Indirect Purchaser Litigation Conference on International Cartels September 8, 2006 Jonathan M. Jacobson

2 The Illinois Brick/Indirect Purchaser Issues  The Illinois Brick decision (U.S., 1977) barred indirect purchasers from suing for overcharge damages under the federal antitrust laws  Some 30 years later, however, over 30 states, either by statute or judicial decision, allow some form of indirect purchaser recovery  In a number of cases, this has led to proceedings both in federal court and numerous state courts, simultaneously, to address damages claims from the same conduct  The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 has mitigated, but not eliminated, this phenomenon

3 The Illinois Brick/Indirect Purchaser Issues  These indirect purchaser issues were high on the list of questions AMC set down for consideration  The subject was AMC’s first hearing Witnesses representing direct purchaser plaintiffs; indirect purchaser plaintiffs; State AGs; the ABA; and the defense bar

4 The Illinois Brick/Indirect Purchaser Issues  A significant majority of the AMC expressed the view from the outset that the multiplicity of proceedings resulting from the coexistence of Illinois Brick and state indirect purchaser laws was a problem, and that the problem was one that should be addressed through Congressional legislation There was, however, a credible argument advanced that a “wait and see” attitude was appropriate to observe the effects of CAFA But given the ability to plead around CAFA in a number of cases, and the various other problems CAFA does not address (such as the threat of multiple recoveries), a majority expressed the view that additional change was appropriate

5 AMC Recommendations  Six commissioners voted to support the view that the optimal solution, in an ideal world, would be to have the rule of Illinois Brick apply across the board to all federal and state claims  The commissioners recognize, however, that this ideal solution is not a realistic solution; and, so, the AMC will make legislative recommendations that presume indirect purchaser recovery  Only 1 of 12 commissioners expressed the view that “no change” from the current regime is warranted

6 AMC Recommendations 1. “Recommend that Illinois Brick be overruled by statute so that indirect purchasers may sue under federal law to recover damages” (11 favor) 2. Recommend that the rule in Hanover Shoe, barring the pass-on defense in overcharge cases, be modified to provide that defendants’ liability in the single direct/indirect purchaser claims proceeding (described below) will be limited to the damages suffered by direct purchasers (without regard to pass-on), which will be apportioned among all non- remote purchasers in full satisfaction of their claims (11 favor) Where only direct purchasers sue, and indirect purchasers do not or cannot, Hanover Shoe will continue to bar a pass-on defense (10 favor)

7 AMC Recommendations 3. “Recommend a statute that will permit resolution of both pre-trial and trial matters of all purchaser claims in a single forum” (10 favor) This means a limited reversal of Lexecon 4. “Recommend adoption of a statutory provision that would allow removal of all state indirect purchaser actions to federal court to the full extent permitted under the Constitution” (11 favor) A minority (5) would recommend preemption of state indirect purchaser laws rather than relying on removal

8 AMC Recommendations  The AMC report will also encourage courts to structure proceedings so that proof of violation and the total amount of overcharge are separated, where appropriate and permissible, from the allocation of damages among direct and indirect purchasers  Report will also state that it is not the AMC’s intent to alter the standards for class certification; instead, AMC expects that classes will be certified with the same frequency as occurs now pre-legislation This is important because introduction of a pass-on defense, without regard to the class certification process, could lead to great difficulties in certifying classes of either direct or indirect purchasers Thus, individual issues arising from the fact and degree of pass-on should not preclude class certification so long as there is sufficient commonality regarding issues of violation and aggregate overcharge damages

9 Challenges Going Forward  Many issues that we already encounter today: Determining which indirect purchasers can sue and which are too remote (e.g., consumer suits filed against Visa and MasterCard based on alleged overcharges to merchants resolved in Wal-Mart) Determining rates of pass-through from direct to indirect purchasers, and allocation of damages among them Settlement approval processes for cases involving both direct and indirect purchasers

10 Challenges Going Forward  Some new issues that may arise from the proposed legislation Developing class certification standards to allow the single- proceeding resolution that the proposed legislation envisions Ensuring ability to remove cases filed under novel theories of indirect purchaser recovery (e.g., state consumer fraud statutes)