Practice area: Antitrust and Illegal Sales Practices
CP&M has filed numerous antitrust actions recently based on allegations of price fixing in the international electronics field (Liquid Crystal Displays, high definition televisions and monitors, and other devices). If you believe you have been the victim of price fixing, you may contact us at TAKE ACTION to explore the legal issues.
Examples of our antitrust litigation include:
Municipal Derivative Investment Antitrust Litigation
Along with co-counsel, CPM represents Los Angeles and numerous public entities who purchased Guaranteed Investment Contracts (“GICs”) and other derivative investments. GICs and derivative investments are purchased from sellers of municipal securities through a competitive bidding process overseen by municipal securities brokers. They are purchased when public entities issue tax-exempt municipal bonds to raise funds to finance public works projects and have funds that are not immediately needed for the project. CPM’s investigation has uncovered, and the complaints allege, that the competitive bidding process is a sham as securities sellers and brokers in the derivative investment market have engaged in a conspiracy to allocate the market and rig the bidding process in violation of antitrust law and common law.
Click here to view the complaint. 
PDF, 1.5 MB
Municipal Bond Insurance Antitrust Litigation
CPM represents Los Angeles and numerous public entities who issued tax-exempt municipal bonds to raise funds to finance public works projects and were compelled to purchase insurance for those bond issuances. When a public entity issues bonds, its credit rating determines the interest it will pay to bond holders. To reduce the interest rate, public entities have had to purchase bond insurance to improve their credit worthiness (despite an historical default rate of less than 0.1 percent). CPM’s investigation has uncovered and the complaints allege that the bond insurance companies violated antitrust law and common law by conspiring to maintain a dual credit rating system that discriminates against public entities (versus private corporations), causing public entities to pay unusually high premiums to purchase unnecessary bond insurance, and failure of the bond insurance companies to disclose they made risky investments in the subprime market that has led to the downgrading of the bond insurers’ own credit ratings.
Class Action Suit Alleges Price-Fixing Conspiracy in the Ocean Shipping Industry
On April 17, 2008, the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division raided the offices of a number of major ocean shipping companies, including Defendants Horizon and Crowley. Others received subpoenas for documents from the federal government. The subject of the federal investigation related to a pervasive conspiracy in the ocean shipping industry to artificially raise the price of shipping goods between the continental United States and its territories, primarily Puerto Rico, Guam and Hawaii. CP&M, on behalf of a class of individuals and entities, filed suit in the Southern District of Florida and the Northern District of California, accusing the major ocean shipping companies of violating federal antitrust laws and seeks the recovery of treble damages for the losses suffered by consumers. This conspiracy has enriched the Defendants while harming the American economy and American businesses. The suit accuses the Defendants of: (1) conspiring to fix fuel surcharges on domestic shipping rates, (2) conspiracy to decrease and stabilize shipping capacity, (3) conspiracy to fix domestic intermodal rates to shippers, and (4) a concerted and coordinated refusal to deal with freight forwarders. By conspiring to fix prices, the ocean shipping industry has deprived consumers of the right to free and fair competition.
Kopies, Inc. et al vs. Eastman Kodak Co.
Clv. No. C94-0524 JLQ (N.D. Cal.)
Antitrust class action by copier service firms against parts manufacturer for illegal tying of products and services. (Class certified, 1994; settlement finally approved, 1999)
In re Citric Acid Antitrust Litigation
MDL No. 1092 and Master File No. C95-2963 FMS (N.D. Cal.)
Antitrust class action against Archer-Daniels Midland Co. and others for conspiracy to fix prices and restrain trade. (Class certified, 1996, settled in part and on appeal, 1998)
In re Methionine Antitrust Litigation
MDL No. 1311 (N.D. Cal.)
Antitrust class action against several methionine manufacturers for conspiracy to fix the prices of and allocate the markets for methionine.
In re Beer Antitrust Litigation
No. 94-20644 SW (N.D. Cal.)
Antitrust class action on behalf of specialty beer brewers against Anheuser-Busch, Inc. for attempt to monopolize U.S. beer industry by denying access to distribution channels.
In re Commercial Tissue Products Public Entity Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litigation
Coordinated Proceedings 4027
County of San Mateo v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.
San Francisco County Superior Court No. 989138
Antitrust class action on behalf of class of public entity consumers of commercial sanitary paper products against alleged price-fixing conspiracy among producers. (Appointed co-lead counsel for public entity class, 1998)
In re Sodium Gluconate Antitrust Litigation
MDL 1226
Chemical Distribution, Inc. v. AKZO Nobel Chemicals, BV
No. 97-4142 CW (N.D. Cal.)
Chemical Distribution, Inc. v. Roquette Freres
No. 98-00070 (N.D. Cal.)
Antitrust class actions for price fixing of sodium gluconate, an industrial cleaning agent. (Class certified, 1998; settlement finally approved, 1999)
Livingston v. Toyota Motor Sales USA, Inc.
No. C94-1377 MHP (N.D. Cal.)
Antitrust class action under Sherman Act by purchasers of Toyota vehicles for secret rebates. (Settled 1997)
Truta v. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc.
193 Cal.App.3d 802 (1987)
Class action for antitrust and unfair business practices.
E. & J. Gallo Winery v. EnCana Energy Services, et al., 03-5624 (E.D. Cal.)
Antitrust action against natural gas merchants for manipulating prices charged to end users for natural gas.
Dry Creek Corporation v. El Paso Corporation, JCCP 4221 (Super. Ct. San Diego Cty.). Antitrust action against El Paso for withholding natural gas from California in order to drive up prices.