Back to Practice Areas

Williams Montgomery & John Ltd. has substantial experience both prosecuting and defending complex, nationwide antitrust actions in which our clients have either suffered millions of dollars of losses arising from anticompetitive activity or are themselves facing potentially catastrophic liability. Given the complexity and often enormous stakes involved in antitrust litigation, trials of such cases are very rare. It thus speaks volumes that three Williams Montgomery partners have tried antitrust cases to conclusion, and that in each case the jury has returned a verdict in our client’s favor. See Pease, et al. v. Jasper Wyman & Sons, et al. (Knox Cty. Sup. Ct., Me) (Following a two week jury trial, Williams Montgomery partner Charles Tompkins obtained a $56 million judgment in favor of Maine blueberry cooperatives alleging a scheme to fix the price at which their blueberries were purchased); In re Industrial Silicon Antitrust Litig., (W.D. Pa.) (Following a five-week jury trial, Williams Montgomery partner Theodore Low obtained a defense verdict for Applied Industrial Materials Corporation; the plaintiffs had sought $210 million in damages for alleged price-fixing); United States of America v. International Paper Co., et al. (S.D. Tex.) (Following a four-month-long jury trial, named partner Barry Montgomery successfully obtained the acquittal of a Weyerhauser employee facing criminal charges in what was then the largest criminal antitrust suit ever brought by the Department of Justice).

Currently, Charles Tompkins, the head of the antitrust practice group, represents several of the nation’s largest bedding manufacturers and licensers as plaintiffs in In re Polyurethane Foam Antitrust Litigation, C.A. No. 10-md-02196 (N.D. Ohio), in which our clients paid tens of millions of dollars in overcharges as a result of an alleged nationwide conspiracy to fix the price of polyurethane foam. These clients, including Englander Mattress Co. and Spring Air International LLC, retained Williams Montgomery & John Ltd. on a contingency basis to steer their claims through a complex multi-district litigation that includes two separate putative class actions and requires sophisticated legal and economic analysis, without the risk of incurring legal fees unless we obtain a recovery.

Mr. Tompkins also has been appointed lead class counsel in complex direct purchaser antitrust actions seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. Mr. Tompkins currently is serving as one of two Court-appointed co-lead counsel in In re Plasma Derivative Protein Therapies Antitrust Litigation, 09-cv-07666 (N.D. Ill.), a nationwide putative class action against manufacturers of plasma protein derivative therapies alleging that certain plasma manufacturers agreed to restrict the national supply of plasma derivatives, thereby driving up the price of those therapies. Mr. Tompkins also was appointed Vice Chair of the Executive Committee representing marine construction companies across the Unites States in the case In re Marine Products Antitrust Litigation, C.A. No. 10-cv-2319 (C.D. Cal.) (continuing as Ace Marine Rigging & Supply, Inc. v. Virginia Harbor Services, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 11-cv-00436 (C.D. Cal) and Board of Commissions of the Port of New Orleans v. Virginia Harbor Services, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 11-cv-00437 (C.D. Cal)), which alleged a conspiracy to rig bids on marine construction projects. These cases settled for over $5 million.

For more information about the firm's antitrust practice, please contact Mr. Tompkins, at 312.443.3286 or

Partners Practicing in this Area

Associates Practicing in this Area