Jan Harrison, et al v. E.I DuPont De Nemours and Company et al

  1. August 16, 2018

    $3.5M Paint Price-Fix Deal OK'd After DuPont's 3rd Circ. Win

    A California federal judge on Thursday approved a $3.5 million deal DuPont and other companies reached to end consumer claims they conspired to fix a paint ingredient's price, calling it "in the best interest of the class" since the Third Circuit affirmed DuPont's win in a similar case.

  2. July 20, 2017

    DuPont, Others Make $3.5M Deal In Paint Price-Fixing Suit

    DuPont and other chemical makers have agreed to pay a proposed class of paint buyers $3.5 million to end a suit alleging the companies schemed to fix the price of a paint ingredient, according to a motion filed by the plaintiffs in California federal court Thursday.

  3. June 14, 2016

    DuPont, Chemical Cos. Can't Ditch Paint Price-Fixing Suit

    DuPont and other chemical makers will have to face the bulk of a proposed class action alleging they schemed to fix the price of a paint ingredient, according to a California ruling Monday that the paint buyers had sufficiently drafted their claims.

  4. August 12, 2015

    Buyers Will Get Another Crack At Paint Pigment Cartel Suit

    A California federal judge dismissed most claims in a proposed class action alleging DuPont Co. and others fixed prices of a paint ingredient Tuesday, although the judge said the plaintiffs may still be able to salvage their suit.

  5. November 18, 2014

    DuPont Seeks Toss Of Paint Price-Fixing Class Action

    DuPont Co. on Monday urged a California federal judge to dismiss a putative class action brought over an alleged price-fixing scheme involving a paint ingredient, saying the indirect purchasers have failed to fix the flaws that led to the judge's recent dismissal of most of their claims.

  6. September 23, 2014

    DuPont Gets Partial Dismissal Of Indirect Buyers' Cartel Suit

    A California federal judge on Monday trimmed some of the claims in a putative class action alleging DuPont Co. and other chemical makers conspired to fix the price of a paint ingredient, finding that the indirect purchasers didn't have standing to bring claims in all 32 states included in the suit.

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!