Emerging Trends In Indirect-Purchaser Antitrust Cases

Law360, New York (January 19, 2012, 1:48 PM EST) -- Since the enactment of the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), 28 U.S.C. §1332(d), federal district courts handling indirect-purchaser price-fixing and market allocation cases have been confronted with arguments by defendants that indirect-purchaser plaintiffs asserting antitrust claims under federal and state law lack antitrust standing.

These arguments rely on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Assoc. Gen. Contractors of Cal. (AGC) v. Cal. State Council of Carpenters[1], and assert, for example, that indirect purchasers’ antitrust injuries are too remote from the defendants’ unlawful conduct or are not...
To view the full article, register now.
Law360 Pro Say Podcast
Check out Law360's new podcast, Pro Say, which offers a weekly recap of both the biggest stories and hidden gems from the world of law.