Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Leaderboard Analytics
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
IN RE: RAIL FREIGHT FUEL SURCHARGE ANTITRUST LITIGATION - MDL 1869
Case Number:
1:07-mc-00489
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Multi Party Litigation:
Class Action
Judge:
Firms
- King & Spalding
- Freed Kanner
- Saltz Mongeluzzi
- Peterson & Associates PC
- Yetter Coleman
- Dentons
- Covington & Burling
- Skadden Arps
- Wollmuth Maher
- Werner Ahari
- Gustafson Gluek
- Lovell Stewart
- Munger Tolles
- Cleary Gottlieb
- Gross & Belsky
- Jones Day
- Zelle LLP
- Ballard Spahr
- Cera LLP
- Slover & Loftus
- Massey & Gail
- Audet & Partners
- Cuneo Gilbert
- Thompson Hine
- Paulson & Nace
- Spector Roseman
- Heins Mills
- Seeger Weiss
- The Terrell Law Group
- Boni Zack
- Haskell Slaughter
- Robins Kaplan
- Carella Byrne
- Goodwin Procter
- Nussbaum Law Group
- Keller Rohrback
- Kaplan Fox
- Steptoe LLP
- Walters Renwick
- Horn Aylward
- Freed & Weiss
- Hausfeld LLP
- Mehri & Skalet
- Wolf Haldenstein
- Lowey Dannenberg
- Eimer Stahl
- Dechert LLP
- Quinn Emanuel
- Levi & Korsinsky
- Much Shelist
- Crowell & Moring
- Whatley Kallas
- Weil Gotshal
- Cohen Milstein
- Williams Schifino
- Sperling Kenny
- Vinson & Elkins
- Troutman
- Berger Montague
- Susman Godfrey
- Clyde & Co
- Ashcraft & Gerel
- Orrick Herrington
- Arnold & Porter
- Fine Kaplan
- Haug Partners
- Latham & Watkins
- Mayer Brown
Companies
- Cedar Creek Wholesale Inc.
- M.C. Dixon Lumber Co. Inc.
- Rayonier Inc.
- Alabama Power
- Kellogg Co.
- Olin Corp.
- Ameren Corp.
- Oxbow Corp.
- Northern Indiana Public Service Co.
- AK Steel Holding Corp.
- Georgia Power Co.
- Ferraro Foods Inc.
- CSX Corp.
- The Southern Co. Inc.
- Association of American Railroads
- Dyno Nobel Ltd.
- CF Industries Holdings Inc.
- Dow Inc.
- Kansas City Southern
- Entergy Corp.
- BNSF Railway Co.
- Norfolk Southern Corp.
- Union Pacific Corp.
- Alabama Power Co.
- Dairyland Power Cooperative
Government Agencies
Sectors & Industries:
-
October 03, 2013
Rail Shippers Say Full Review Of Class Cert. Not Needed
A group of rail shippers on Wednesday accused several freight companies of improperly trying to force a wholesale re-evaluation of class certification in a price-fixing case, saying the D.C. Circuit's recent ruling only required renewed scrutiny of one issue with their damages model.
-
September 03, 2013
Latham & Watkins Dodges DQ Bid In Rail Price-Fixing MDL
Latham & Watkins LLP can represent Union Pacific Railroad Co. in multidistrict litigation accusing several railroad companies of fixing shipping prices, despite the firm's past work for plaintiff Oxbow Carbon & Minerals LLC, a federal judge found Tuesday.
-
July 29, 2013
Railways Say Plaintiffs Withholding Info In Freight Pricing MDL
Union Pacific Railroad Co. and the other rail freight companies that stand accused of fixing shipping prices told the judge overseeing the massive class action on Friday that the plaintiffs are withholding crucial information about an expert witness.
-
July 09, 2013
Latham DQ May Complicate MDL Conflicts, Judge Says
A Washington federal judge voiced concern Tuesday over Oxbow Carbon & Minerals LLC's quest to disqualify Latham & Watkins LLP from serving as lead trial counsel for Union Pacific Railroad Co. in a massive price-fixing multidistrict litigation, saying it's nearly impossible to rule out all potential conflicts of interest in the current legal industry.
-
May 20, 2013
Latham Blasts Oxbow DQ Bid In Rail Price-Fixing MDL
Latham & Watkins LLP said Friday it should be able to continue representing Union Pacific Railroad Co. in multidistrict price-fixing litigation, slamming Oxbow Carbon & Mineral LLC for allegedly dropping most of its original arguments in a bid to disqualify the firm.
-
May 07, 2013
Latham, Oxbow Spar Over DQ Bid In Rail Price-Fixing MDL
Latham & Watkins LLP and Oxbow Carbon & Mineral LLC traded blows in Washington federal court Monday as to whether the company deserves a chance to further reply to a bid to disqualify it from representing Union Pacific Railroad Co. in multidistrict price-fixing litigation.
-
March 29, 2013
Oxbow Wants Latham DQ'd From Rail Price-Fixing MDL
Oxbow Carbon & Minerals LLC has moved to disqualify Latham & Watkins LLP from serving as lead trial counsel for Union Pacific Railroad Co. in multidistrict litigation accusing several railroad companies of fixing shipping prices, saying that the firm's past work for the mining company created a conflict of interest.
-
July 05, 2012
Freight Rail Giants Protest Class Cert. In Price-Fixing MDL
The four largest U.S. freight railroad companies on Thursday asked the D.C. Circuit to nix the certification of a class of direct purchasers who allege the companies fixed shipping prices, saying the certification puts pressure on the railroads to settle meritless claims.
-
June 21, 2012
Direct Purchasers Get Class Cert. In Railroad Antitrust MDL
A Washington federal judge on Thursday certified a class of direct purchasers who are suing several railroad companies in an antitrust multidistrict litigation over allegations that the companies fixed shipping prices through an arbitrary fuel surcharge.
-
June 09, 2010
BNSF, Union Pacific To Show Docs In Freight Fuel MDL
BNSF Railway Co. and Union Pacific Railroad Co., two of four major rail defendants in antitrust multidistrict litigation over rail freight fuel surcharges, will have to present certain communications with the Association of American Railroads for in-camera review so a federal judge can determine if they should be privileged.