Retail & Consumer Products Law Observer

Retail & Consumer Products Law Observer

Legal Insight for the Retail and Consumer Products Industry

Category Archives: Antitrust & Claims Recovery

Subscribe to Antitrust & Claims Recovery RSS Feed

Ad Fraud and Programmatic Buying Are Eroding Trust in Digital Media

Posted in Advertising & Product Risk Management, Antitrust & Claims Recovery
This year, digital media spending is expected to outstrip spending on traditional media, such as television and print. Advertisers, lured by the promise of precise targeting, better ability to measure return on investment, and changing consumer media consumption patterns, have poured money into digital at an almost exponential rate. And, while there are studies (largely… Continue Reading

Join C&M and other legal experts for the FBA’s Fashion Law Conference

Posted in Advertising & Product Risk Management, Antitrust & Claims Recovery, Consumer Class Action, International Trade, IP/Brand Protection, Privacy & Data Protection
On February 12, 2016, the Federal Bar Association will host a day-long Fashion Law Conference at Parsons School of Design (Starr Foundation Hall in the New School’s stunning new University Center) on the last day of New York Fashion Week! Speakers include in-house counsel from The Estee Lauder Companies, Inc., Tiffany & Co., New York &… Continue Reading

Simon Property Group Accused of Using Anticompetitive Tactics

Posted in Antitrust & Claims Recovery, Real Estate
Simon Property Group was sued recently for using anticompetitive tactics to prevent key retailers from following through with lease agreements. Gumwood HP Shopping Partners LP alleges that Simon has a pattern of abusing its power to bully its tenants into complying with its wishes. The suit asserts Simon engaged in monopolization, attempted monopolization and restraint… Continue Reading

Recovery Opportunities for Retailers

Posted in Antitrust & Claims Recovery
On May 5th, Crowell & Moring’s Retail Law partnered with the Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC) to host the first webcast of a 3-part retail law series: “Recovery Opportunities for Retailers: Turning A Retail Law Department Into A Profit Center in Retail Leasing, Global Sourcing and Antitrust Litigation.” The webcast was moderated by the chair… Continue Reading

Crowell & Moring to Partner with Association of Corporate Counsel to Host Webcast Series on Retail Law

Posted in Antitrust & Claims Recovery
On Thursday, May 5th at 11am PST / 2pm EST, Crowell & Moring’s Retail Law practice will partner with the Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC) to host the first webcast of a 3-part retail law series. The topic of the first webcast is “Recovery Opportunities for Retailers:  Turning A Retail Law Department Into A Profit Center… Continue Reading

California’s Broad Predatory Pricing Law May Make It Easier to Bring Suits Against California Retailers and Manufacturers

Posted in Antitrust & Claims Recovery
The California Supreme Court has let stand an appellate court ruling that allows for broad interpretation of California state predatory pricing law. Significantly, the case holds that proof of recoupment is not required to prevail in predatory pricing cases. This broad interpretation means that it will be easier to bring predatory pricing cases against California… Continue Reading

U.S. Retailers File Price-Fixing Lawsuit Against LCD Makers

Posted in Antitrust & Claims Recovery
On November 1, a number of large U.S. retailers, including Target, Sears, Kmart, RadioShack, Newegg, and the former CompUSA, filed an antitrust lawsuit in federal court in the Northern District of California, alleging that they were injured as a result of a global price-fixing conspiracy by the major manufacturers of Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) panels. The… Continue Reading

Minimum Price Agreements Between Manufacturers and Retailers Are No Longer Per Se Illegal, Now Subject to “Rule of Reason”

Posted in Antitrust & Claims Recovery
Case: Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc., DBA Kay’s Kloset, No. 06-480 (U.S. Sup. Ct. 6/28/07)The One Sentence Summary: Reversing 96 years of antitrust precedent that made minimum resale price agreements between manufacturers and retailers per se illegal, U.S. Supreme Court held in 5-4 decision that vertical price restraints are to be analyzed… Continue Reading