The State Of Umbrella Damages Under Calif. Antitrust Law | Resources | Robins Kaplan LLP Law Firm

County of San Mateo v. CSL suggests umbrella damages for cartel-motivated price raises by non-cartel members possible for state law claims.

October 7, 2014

Law360, New York (October 07, 2014, 10:08 AM ET) -- Several federal courts have held that damages caused when noncartel members raise prices in response to cartel behavior are not recoverable under the Sherman Act. [1] These courts reason that so‐called “umbrella damages” are "unacceptably speculative and complex" because they require inquiry into whether nonconspirators' prices were caused by the cartel or other pricing considerations. Petroleum Products, 691 F.2d at 1340‐41. Applying these principles, at least one court from the Northern District of California has also barred umbrella damages under state antitrust laws.[2]

All Content © 2003-2012, Portfolio Media, Inc.

The articles on our website include some of the publications and papers authored by our attorneys, both before and after they joined our firm. The content of these articles should not be taken as legal advice. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or official position of Robins Kaplan LLP.

Disclaimer

Law360

READ FULL ARTICLE

David Martinez

Partner

Pro Bono Chair, Los Angeles Office;
Member of the Firm's Diversity Committee;
Member of Executive Board

May 19, 2022

11th Circ. Ban On Service Awards May Inhibit Class Actions

William Reiss, Dave Rochelson - Law360

May 5, 2022

Antitrust Law As A Tool Against Privacy Abuses

Law 360 - William Reiss and Matthew Geyer

October 25, 2021

Summary of the Trial Decision in Epic Games, Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Geoffrey H. Kozen

Spring 2021

Summary of the United States Senate Subcommittee on Competition Policy, Antitrust, and Consumer Rights Hearing, Antitrust Applied

Ashley Emershaw, Matthew Geyer

April 13, 2021

U.S. Antitrust Regulators Should Foster Climate Collaboration

Ben Steinberg, Adam Mendel - Law360

VIEW ALL

July 28, 2022

Meegan Hollywood Named to Bloomberg Law’s 2022 “They’ve Got Next: The 40 Under 40” List

July 14, 2022

Robins Kaplan’s Antitrust and Intellectual Property Practice Groups Recognized in The Legal 500 Guide

July 11, 2022

Three Partners Named to Crain’s New York Business Notable Diverse Leaders In Law List

June 23, 2022

Robins Kaplan’s Antitrust Class Action Practice Recognized as Leader In The Field For Fourth Consecutive Year

June 1, 2022

Chambers USA Recognizes Five Robins Kaplan Practice Groups And 17 Lawyers In 2022 Guide

VIEW ALL

Back to Top

Any information that you send us in an e-mail message should not be confidential or otherwise privileged information. Sending us an e-mail message will not make you a client of Robins Kaplan LLP. We do not accept representation until we have had an opportunity to evaluate your matter, including but not limited to an ethical evaluation of whether we are in a conflict position to represent you. Accordingly, the information you provide to us in an e-mail should not be information for which you would have an expectation of confidentiality.

If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.

By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.