MURRAY, FRANK & SAILER also represents corporate and individual plaintiffs in litigation related to violations of federal and state antitrust laws. Antitrust laws are part of that group of violations that fall under white-collar crime.  While the government prosecutes many antitrust violations as restraints against free trade and fair competition, other cases can be brought by direct purchasers, as well as indirect purchasers, or consumers.  The law provides that a successful plaintiff in an antitrust case asserting monopolies, monopolistic conduct, or anticompetitive behavior by one or more companies, is permitted to recover damages three times the amount of the windfall profits garnered by the offending company.  The worst offenders of antitrust laws are those that succeed in forcing consumers to pay more than fair prices for goods and services, and thus obtain unfair profits.  Thus, consumers or business victims of such anticompetitive behavior who have suffered damages can sue under state or federal antitrust laws.

MURRAY, FRANK & SAILER has represented plaintiffs in federal and state class actions arising out of applicable anti­trust laws, including the Infant Formula, Brand Name Phar­­­­maceutical, Nasdaq, VISA/Master-Card, Playmobil, and Disposable Contact Lens cases.  In the Playmobil Case, MURRAY, FRANK & SAILER was co-lead counsel, representing a class of purchasers of Playmobil products.  MURRAY, FRANK & SAILER  was successful in obtaining certification of a plaintiff class in an oft-cited opinion and settling the case on favorable terms to the class.  The Court, at the fairness hearing, "compliment[ed] both counsel in the fine job done negotiating with each other and also the legal work that has been submitted to the Court."  In the Disposable Contact Lens case, MURRAY, FRANK & SAILER represented a class of purchasers of disposable contact lenses in California, and eventually obtained reversal in the California appellate courts of a denial of class certification.

MURRAY, FRANK & SAILER is currently lead counsel in a number of cases involving Sherman Act violations: Sevier & Payne v. Time Warner, Inc. et al. (S.D.N.Y.); Schwartz v. The Thomson Corporation (S.D.N.Y.); Slattery v. Apple Computer Inc. (N.D. Cal.).    MFS is also counsel to plaintiffs in other Sherman Act cases: In re American Express Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.); In re Linens Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.); In re Hydrogen Peroxide Antitrust Litigation (E.D. Pa.); In re Intel Antitrust Litigation (D. Del.).

Class Action Lawyers Who Have Obtained Results in Antitrust Lawsuits

Firm Overview | Practice Areas | Institutional Investor | New Cases | Investigations | Join a Class Action | Settled Cases | Attorneys | Articles | Media Inquiries | Contact Us | Home | Disclaimer | Site Map Client Login Sign Up