Practices & Industries

Antitrust & Business Torts

We provide a wide range of services relating to antitrust, trade regulation and business tort matters. We resolve disputes at the state, national and international levels through negotiation, alternative dispute resolution, litigation and the appeals process. Attorneys in our practice group have worked at federal and state antitrust enforcement agencies, held United States Supreme Court judicial clerkships and include former federal prosecutors.

Experience Highlights

Counseling – Counseling corporate clients in their ongoing business matters is the first line of defense. Sound and creative counseling enables clients to realize their commercial objectives and, at the same time, uphold state, national or international antitrust standards. We counsel and advise clients on matters such as:

  • Manufacturing/production activities at the wholesale and retail levels on a wide variety of distribution issues involving both price and non-price questions
  • Trade association formation and management
  • Formation and combination of practice groups, pricing practices as affected by levels of integration, most favored nations clauses, Certificate of Need issues and related matters involving physician groups, hospitals and other medical entities
  • Application of antitrust and trade regulation standards in telecommunications, biotechnology, pharmaceuticals and other high technology markets, as well as traditional industries such as manufacturing, transportation and insurance

We design effective antitrust compliance programs for clients, perform antitrust audits and present antitrust programs for company personnel who have price responsibility and assignments involving competitively sensitive matters.

Litigation – Parker Poe has extensive experience in handling a full range of litigation matters, both in state and federal courts as well as in alternative dispute resolution settings, involving antitrust and competition issues, intellectual property rights and contractual rights that are critical to the strength and success of any business venture in today’s market.

We represent clients in both private and public antitrust cases in federal and state courts, complex multiparty litigation, class actions and multidistrict consolidated antitrust cases. We have been involved in the multiparty defense of several indirect purchaser class action cases and in other major antitrust litigation involving improper assertion of copyright and patent rights and monopolization of downstream service markets.

Parker Poe attorneys have litigated numerous intellectual property cases, including several involving claims of generic pharmaceutical manufacturers, medical device manufacturers and patent or copyright infringement.

We have also been involved in matters relating to consumer protection, business torts, covenants not to compete, advertising, the Lanham Act, trade secrets acts and confidentiality agreements, and obtained a $15 million award from the North Carolina Business Court for misappropriation of trade secrets and unfair competition. Other matters have arisen in litigation brought by private parties, state attorneys general and the FTC.

Defense of federal and state antitrust investigations and cases – We handle civil and criminal matters, including responding to civil investigative demands and grand jury subpoenas, representing both corporate and individual clients in civil and criminal investigations and in lawsuits brought by national and state enforcement agencies. We regularly participate in the administrative trials in Federal Trade Commission (FTC) matters and in their subsequent judicial review. Some of our cases have involved antitrust exemptions, such as the state action doctrine, the McCarran-Ferguson Act, the Noerr-Pennington doctrine and the filed tariff doctrine.

Alternative Dispute Resolution – We have extensive experience with the alternative dispute resolution techniques of arbitration, mediation and summary jury trials. Many of our lawyers served on the task forces and committees charged with developing these methods for use in North Carolina and were involved in writing the rules applicable to these techniques. We were the first firm to participate in a summary jury trial in court in North Carolina.

Mergers & Acquisitions – Our firm has broad experience with pre-merger filings pursuant to the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, with pursuit of merger and acquisition matters both at the Antitrust Division and at the FTC and with the resolution of agency competition concerns.

International – We have represented export trading companies, foreign-based companies and individuals responding to U.S. antitrust investigations and litigation. In addition, we counsel domestic firms facing foreign antitrust claims or considering claims in foreign jurisdictions, particularly in the European Union (EU) and its member states. We have represented clients in connection with mergers and acquisitions subject to EU review.

Intellectual Property – Parker Poe attorneys have been involved in many intellectual property cases, including several involving claims of generic pharmaceutical manufacturers, medical device manufacturers and patent or copyright infringement.

Consumer protection, advertising, business torts and covenants not to compete – We have also been invovled in matters relating to consumer protection, business torts, covenants not to compete, advertising, the Lanham Act, trade secrets acts and confidentiality agreements. These matters have arisen in litigation brought by private parties, state attorneys general and the FTC.

Appeals – We represent clients in appeals in the United States Supreme Court, the United States Courts of Appeals and in state appellate courts.

Experience

  • Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. v. Head & Engquist Equipment, LLC, 2003 N.C.B.C. 6 (N.C. Business Court, July 31, 2003), 2003 NCBC 4 (N.C. Business Court, May 2, 2003) – Represented client in pursuit of claim that competitor had engaged in unfair trade practices by conducting a massive raid of the plaintiff's employees. The North Carolina Business Court awarded damages of $15 million and attorney fees of $1.2 million. The judgment was subsequently affirmed by the North Carolina Court of Appeals on October 18, 2005.
  • North Carolina v. McClure, 2004 N.C.B.C. 8 (N.C. Business Court, December 14, 2004) – Defended trade association of environmental consultants in case brought by the North Carolina Attorney General seeking substantial civil penalties and claiming that members had used the association improperly to seek higher government reimbursement rates and to rig bids. Although the matter was settled, a decision of the North Carolina Business Court dismissed the claim based on the state unfair trade practice statute that permitted the recovery of civil penalties.
  • Suggs-Jacobs v. Physicians Weight Loss Center of America, 2003 N.C.B.C. 8 (N.C. Business Court, November 5, 2003) – Defended claims of alleged price fixing by weight loss centers.
  • Chromalloy Gas Turbine Corp. v. United Technologies Corp, 1999-2 (CCH) Trade Cas. 72,718, 9 SW 3d 324 (Texas Ct. Apps. 1999) – Represented plaintiff in prosecuting claims under Texas antitrust statutes that defendant jet engine manufacturer attempted to monopolize the market for repair of Pratt & Whitney jet engines and defended counterclaims alleging theft of trade secrets. After a four month trial, the jury found that Pratt & Whitney had attempted to monopolize.
  • General Electric Co. v. Commission of the European Communities, Case T-210/01 (Ct. of First Instance Dec. 14, 2005) – Represented manufacturing client at the EU in opposing merger that would have adversely affected competition and the client. The staff opinion opposing the merger adopted portions of our memo in opposition. The merger was disallowed by the European Commission, which was affirmed by the Court of First Instance.
  • In the Matter of LandAmerica Financial Group, Inc., No. C-3808 (Federal Trade Commission, May 20, 1998) – Represented major national title insurance company in merger with two other major title insurers. After an extensive investigation at the FTC, the mergers were allowed subject to certain curative divestiture requirements.
  • FTC v. Ticor Title Insurance Co., 504 U.S. 621 (1992) – Defended major title insurance company against FTC claims that it and other insurers had engaged in improper price fixing through title insurance rating bureaus in six states. The matter produced a major opinion by the U.S. Supreme Court dealing with the "active supervision" requirement of the state action doctrine.
  • Defended alleged price fixing among airlines concerning commissions paid travel agents.
  • Abram v. Charter Medical Corp. of Raleigh, Inc., 100 N.C. App. 718, 398 S.E. 2d 331 (N.C. App., 1990) – Represented defendant operator of a chemical dependency treatment facility against claims of a competitor that it attempted to monopolize and engaged in unfair business practices by challenging the plaintiff's CON application to operate a competing facility. In affirming dismissal of the complaint, the North Carolina Court of Appeals held that the defendant was a "learned professional" within the meaning of N.C.G.S. Sec. 75-1.1(b).
  • Terry’s Floor Fashions, Inc. v. Burlington Industries, Inc., 763 F.2d 604 (4th Circuit, 1985) – Obtained summary judgment on behalf of defendant carpet sales and installation company against claims that it had monopolized and attempted to monopolize the market and engaged in price discrimination.

Experience

  • Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. v. Head & Engquist Equipment, LLC, 2003 N.C.B.C. 6 (N.C. Business Court, July 31, 2003), 2003 NCBC 4 (N.C. Business Court, May 2, 2003) – Represented client in pursuit of claim that competitor had engaged in unfair trade practices by conducting a massive raid of the plaintiff's employees. The North Carolina Business Court awarded damages of $15 million and attorney fees of $1.2 million. The judgment was subsequently affirmed by the North Carolina Court of Appeals on October 18, 2005.
  • North Carolina v. McClure, 2004 N.C.B.C. 8 (N.C. Business Court, December 14, 2004) – Defended trade association of environmental consultants in case brought by the North Carolina Attorney General seeking substantial civil penalties and claiming that members had used the association improperly to seek higher government reimbursement rates and to rig bids. Although the matter was settled, a decision of the North Carolina Business Court dismissed the claim based on the state unfair trade practice statute that permitted the recovery of civil penalties.
  • Suggs-Jacobs v. Physicians Weight Loss Center of America, 2003 N.C.B.C. 8 (N.C. Business Court, November 5, 2003) – Defended claims of alleged price fixing by weight loss centers.
  • Chromalloy Gas Turbine Corp. v. United Technologies Corp, 1999-2 (CCH) Trade Cas. 72,718, 9 SW 3d 324 (Texas Ct. Apps. 1999) – Represented plaintiff in prosecuting claims under Texas antitrust statutes that defendant jet engine manufacturer attempted to monopolize the market for repair of Pratt & Whitney jet engines and defended counterclaims alleging theft of trade secrets. After a four month trial, the jury found that Pratt & Whitney had attempted to monopolize.
  • General Electric Co. v. Commission of the European Communities, Case T-210/01 (Ct. of First Instance Dec. 14, 2005) – Represented manufacturing client at the EU in opposing merger that would have adversely affected competition and the client. The staff opinion opposing the merger adopted portions of our memo in opposition. The merger was disallowed by the European Commission, which was affirmed by the Court of First Instance.
  • In the Matter of LandAmerica Financial Group, Inc., No. C-3808 (Federal Trade Commission, May 20, 1998) – Represented major national title insurance company in merger with two other major title insurers. After an extensive investigation at the FTC, the mergers were allowed subject to certain curative divestiture requirements.
  • FTC v. Ticor Title Insurance Co., 504 U.S. 621 (1992) – Defended major title insurance company against FTC claims that it and other insurers had engaged in improper price fixing through title insurance rating bureaus in six states. The matter produced a major opinion by the U.S. Supreme Court dealing with the "active supervision" requirement of the state action doctrine.
  • Defended alleged price fixing among airlines concerning commissions paid travel agents.
  • Abram v. Charter Medical Corp. of Raleigh, Inc., 100 N.C. App. 718, 398 S.E. 2d 331 (N.C. App., 1990) – Represented defendant operator of a chemical dependency treatment facility against claims of a competitor that it attempted to monopolize and engaged in unfair business practices by challenging the plaintiff's CON application to operate a competing facility. In affirming dismissal of the complaint, the North Carolina Court of Appeals held that the defendant was a "learned professional" within the meaning of N.C.G.S. Sec. 75-1.1(b).
  • Terry’s Floor Fashions, Inc. v. Burlington Industries, Inc., 763 F.2d 604 (4th Circuit, 1985) – Obtained summary judgment on behalf of defendant carpet sales and installation company against claims that it had monopolized and attempted to monopolize the market and engaged in price discrimination.
Name/Title Phone V-Card Email

Catharine Biggs Arrowood

Partner

 t 919.890.4142 V-Card Email

Scott E. Bayzle

Partner

 t 919.835.4627 V-Card Email

Eric H. Cottrell

Partner

 t 704.335.9850 V-Card Email

Melanie Black Dubis

Partner

 t 919.890.4158 V-Card Email

Annette K. Ebright

Associate

 t 704.335.9069 V-Card Email

Deborah L. Edney

Partner

 t 704.335.9856 V-Card Email

Richard S. Glaser, Jr.

Partner

 t 704.335.9531 V-Card Email

John F. Graybeal

Of Counsel

 t 919.835.4599 V-Card Email

Josephine H. Hicks

Partner

 t 704.335.9025 V-Card Email

Sarah Fulton Hutchins

Associate

 t 704.335.6639 V-Card Email

James C. Lesnett, Jr.

Partner

 t 704.335.9067 V-Card Email

Matthew H. Mall

Associate

 t 919.835.4626 V-Card Email

William L. Rikard, Jr.

Partner

 t 704.335.9011 V-Card Email

Robert W. Spearman

Of Counsel

 t 919.890.4167 V-Card Email

Eric D. Welsh

Partner

 t 704.335.9052 V-Card Email

Brian R. Weyhrich

Associate

 t 704.335.9534 V-Card Email

Cynthia L. Wittmer

Partner

 t 919.890.4171 V-Card Email

News

Events

Contact