|
Covington is skilled in all aspects of defending antitrust class actions, not only with respect to the substantive antitrust claims but also in managing the intricacies of the class-action process.
Covington is currently defending more than a score of antitrust class actions in both federal and state courts. Our defense strategies include obtaining early derailment of a putative class suit by dispositive motion, such as lack of standing of class representatives or failure to state a claim, or by successful opposition to the motion for class certification. Or, in appropriate circumstances, we have negotiated settlements of class-action claims, structured to as to minimize the financial impact on our clients while providing maximum protection against new claims. Where necessary, we can defend the merits of a class-action claim through trial and on appeal. On both merits and class-action issues, we have worked closely with the nation’s top antitrust economists and other expert witnesses in a variety of industries and disciplines.
Representative Matters
- In the Currency Conversion Antitrust Litigation, in which we represent JPMorganChase, we took the lead in briefing and arguing arbitration issues that put certain of plaintiffs’ claims at risk and subsequently participated in a mediation culminating in a negotiated settlement.
- In the Medical Residents Antitrust Litigation, we represented seven of the 30 defendants, and on behalf of all defendants took the lead in developing the opposition to plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. Before that issue was resolved, however, we were successful in obtaining dismissal of the complaint on the merits, and then in defending the victory on appeal before the D.C. Circuit.
- We represented a leading manufacturer of rubber chemicals in over twenty state and federal class actions brought on behalf of direct and indirect purchasers. The majority of these cases were dismissed, in most instances on preliminary motions. In the one case to reach plaintiffs' motion for class certification, the motion was denied. The cases were settled in 2007.
- We represented a major prescription drug manufacturer in connection with a putative class action involving allegations of conspiracy to restrict the importation of prescription drugs from abroad. The case was dismissed on the pleadings based on a successful showing that plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate antitrust injury because the complaint alleged restrictions only on illegal importation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|