TCL is at the forefront of antitrust enforcement, representing nation-wide classes of purchasers who have been subject to anticompetitive practices and forced to pay inflated prices for products in a variety of industries. We are actively involved in the prosecution of antitrust actions in markets including pharmaceuticals, technology, auto parts, cable television services, truck stop services, contact lenses and food supplies.
-
Marchese v. Cablevision (D.N.J.)
As co-lead counsel, we represented consumers alleging Cablevision refused to provide consumers with cable services if they didn’t also agree to rent the defendant’s set-top boxes at inflated rates. We ultimately secured more than $70 million in settlement value for the class.
-
In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Ill.)
As class counsel, we represented a class of restaurants alleging that the nation’s largest chicken producers conspired to inflate prices. The settlement in this case provided for over $100 million in relief for the class.
-
In re Google Digital Advertising Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.)
As members of the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee, TCL represents a proposed class of online advertisers in this digital-advertising monopoly case.
-
In re Automotive Parts Antitrust Litigation (E.D. Mich.)
As class counsel in this action, our clients allege that the defendants conspired to fix the prices of various auto parts, and we helped recover more than $1 billion for a class of indirect purchasers who paid inflated prices for automotive components.
-
Reznich v. Archery Trade Assoc. Inc. (D. Minn.)
We represent a proposed class of archery-equipment purchasers alleging that the nation's largest archery-equipment manufacturers and retailers conspired to fix prices.
-
In re Fire Apparatus Antitrust Litigation (E.D. Wisc.)
We represent a proposed class of cities and towns that indirectly purchased the defendants’ “Fire Apparatuses,” e.g., firetrucks. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants’ conspired to artificially inflate the price of fire apparatuses, which has in turn forced municipalities to overpay for this essential equipment.
-
Giant Eagle, Inc. v. Visa USA Inc. (E.D.N.Y.)
We represented Giant Eagle in a private individual settlement in antitrust action alleging that Visa, MasterCard and a number of their member banks conspired fix the price of interchange fees charged to the merchants who accepted those cards, and we successfully negotiated an individual settlement for Giant Eagle.