Judge rejects Toshiba’s argument that Illinois Brick bars retailers case in LCD flat panel antitrust litigation

December 14, 2012 by

A California federal judge refused to nix a group of retailers’ price-fixing claims against a slew of electronics makers in the liquid crystal display panel multidistrict litigation, deciding the indirect purchaser plaintiffs aren’t barred by the US Supreme Court Illinois Brick or the Ninth Circuit’s ATM fee ruling from seeking antitrust damages.

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston denied two motions for partial summary judgment filed by Toshiba Corp., LG Display Co. Ltd., AU Optronics Corp., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and 10 other LCD makers, saying the Illinois Brick ruling and Ninth Circuit’s ATM fee ruling did not do away with the exception that indirect purchasers can bring Sherman Act Antitrust claims if there is a conspiracy or ownership ties between the manufacturers and the direct purchasers, which was a question of fact in those cases.

Steve Larson
An experienced trial lawyer who handles both hourly and contingent fee cases, Steve has expertise in class actions, consumer cases, antitrust litigation, securities litigation, corporate disputes, intellectual property disputes, unfair competition claims, employment matters, and disputes involving family wealth. Steve regularly represents individuals and businesses in federal and state court and has obtained class-wide recovery in multiple class actions. A veteran practitioner, Steve's clients value his creative approach to resolving complex litigation matters.

Legal Disclaimer

The information contained in this blog does not constitute legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. We make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to this blog.