Manatt's antitrust team handles complex disputes involving pricing, monopolization, cartels, collusion, and controversial mergers and acquisitions. Because we have highly knowledgeable counsel across many practice areas and trusted relationships with industry and government officials, your case will be handled efficiently, thoroughly and with the greatest possibility of success. Our lawyers have the experience and industry knowledge to structure your transaction to achieve your business objectives and avoid trouble with regulators. We can quickly handle Hart-Scott-Rodino filings and secure regulatory approvals of mergers, acquisitions and joint ventures without unnecessary delay or controversy. Our deeply rooted, field-tested antitrust compliance strategies meet the requirements of the federal antitrust laws, as well as all state antitrust legislation.
We have deep experience in counseling on antitrust issues in business practices and dealings with third parties. And, having a world-class litigation team in your corner will help you avoid litigation. However, when litigation is unavoidable, or in your best interests, we're also the ones to have on your side. We have successfully litigated civil and criminal antitrust cases for clients across the country.
California's Unfair Competition Law
If you're in California, our lawyers can provide particular insight into the state's unfair competition law. As UCL litigation has increased throughout the past decade, we've successfully represented defendants, plaintiffs and amicus curiae. Our lawyers are well-versed in the statute's nearly 80 years of related case law and legislative history, and we've helped shape judicial interpretation by taking first-impression cases to the state courts of appeal and Supreme Court.
Who we work with
We have a team of lawyers experienced in protecting your business through antitrust and unfair competition litigation across a number of industries, including advertising, entertainment, financial services and banking, healthcare and consumer products.
What we do
We handle complex advice and disputes involving pricing, monopolization, cartels, collusion, mergers and acquisitions, and all types of UCL disputes, including patent infringement, regulatory claims, employment litigation and advertising claims.
Experience on Your Side
Manatt antitrust lawyers know the law because they have helped enforce it and shape it. Members of our team have:
- Enforced federal law as members of the U.S.Attorney's Office and the Justice Department's Antitrust Division
- Served as counsel to the Federal Trade Commission, the President's Commission on Organized Crime, and both Congress and the White House
- Advised the California Judicial Council on creating the official antitrust law jury instruction for the state and the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference
- Held leadership positions as Chair of the State Bar of California and Los Angeles County Antitrust and Trade Regulation Law Sections and as Vice Chair of the American Healthcare Association Standing Committee on Antitrust
- Written the leading federal antitrust law handbook and the first compendium of antitrust law jury instructions for any state, as well as many other articles and treatises on antitrust law
We know what the antitrust statutes mean, what the regulators want, and what the best strategies are for achieving your business goals.
- We won a motion to dismiss for the American Land Title Association (ALTA) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. A lawyer acting pro se sued ALTA and four of the nation’s largest title insurers, alleging a variety of antitrust violations. At the core of the suit was the allegation that a provision in a standard title insurance policy that had been drafted by our client and was widely used by title insurers duped policyholders into buying illusory coverage. The plaintiff had previously sued under such a policy and won recovery, only to learn that his damages were capped by a provision in the policy that limited his recovery to $600,000 (he was seeking to recover millions). He brought this case, he argued, to put an end to collusive and anticompetitive pricing and contract terms. The court accepted our argument that the plaintiff lacked antitrust standing.
- We secured summary judgment for Ticketmaster in a Section 1 and 2 and UCL case alleging illegal exclusive dealing and monopolization of the ticketing services market.
- For more than a decade we guided Texas Health Resources through antitrust-related regulatory processes in connection with its establishment of affiliations with multiple additional hospitals, resulting in THR becoming a major regional provider.
- After a decade of DOJ and the state of Florida prosecutions thwarting a Florida-based hospital system’s merger attempts, the provider came to us. Working with the government, we secured early termination of the waiting period under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act and, within a year and without litigation, our client closed on a merger with another hospital system.
- We obtained summary judgment for a multihospital system in a class action suit claiming that our clients’ hospitals throughout Southern California conspired to suppress salaries for nurses. The lawsuit was similar to other cases pending across the United States and was the first one for which summary judgment was obtained.
- We successfully defended and obtained summary judgment in parallel state and federal, consumer class actions alleging price fixing in the retail and wholesale gasoline markets. The state case went up to the California Supreme Court, where we won a unanimous decision on groundbreaking issues involving antitrust law as well as the standard of review in summary judgments. (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield, et al.).
- We secured summary judgment for Dignity Health in an exclusive-dealing, tying, attempted monopolization and unfair competition case involving provider system contracts with insurance plans.
Unfair Competition Litigation
- Figueroa v Northridge Hospital Medical Center etal, __ Cal. App. 4th __, 2005 WL 2671315 (2d Dist. Nov.16, 2005) First impression decision, dismissing appeal of proposed class action complaint against client hospital system, alleging violations of the Labor Code and Unfair Competition Law.
- Olszewski v. Scripps Health, 30 Cal. 4th 798 (2003) Affirming dismissal of Business & Professions Code Section17200 lawsuit against hospitals for enforcing liens in personal injury actions by former Medi-Cal-insured hospital patients.
- Swanson v. St. John's Regional Medical Center, 97 Cal.App. 4th 245 (2002) Upholding hospitals' third-party lien rights, and affirming dismissal of UCL claim against California's largest acute care hospital system.
- Congress of California Seniors v. Catholic Healthcare West, 87 Cal. App. 4th 491 (2nd Dist. 2001) Holding that Medicare and Medicaid laws preempt Unfair Competition Law action by union claiming that hospital submitted false Medicare and Medi-Cal cost reports.
- Crusader Insurance Co. v. Scottsdale Insurance Co., 54Cal. App. 4th 121 (1997) Affirming dismissal of action against client insurer on grounds that plaintiff stated no private right of action, including under Section 17200, to sue for violations of California's Insurance Code.