The purpose of antitrust laws is to prevent intentional monopolies and deceptive trade practices that inhibit a free market. There are both federal and state antitrust laws. It is not always apparent or obvious when a company violates antitrust law, and each case is uniquely determined or calculated based on specific facts of the case. The key question asked in every case is the effect of a business decision on the relevant market.
Typically, federal or state agencies may bring lawsuits against companies, but citizens and companies may also file lawsuits in specified courts. Major antitrust debates have taken place since the late 19th century, and the law is constantly evolving. The government’s focus on upholding antitrust law demonstrates the impact these laws have on protecting our economy and public citizens.
Antitrust Expert Witness Services
If you are bringing a lawsuit involving antitrust violations, it is important your expert witness on damages is not only well-versed in antitrust law, but is also a strong, fact-based evaluator and logician. Thomas Neches is a certified public accountant and expert witness with years of unmatched experience assisting attorneys in litigating and resolving large scale business disputes.
Learn more about our representative engagements and trial testimony involving antitrust law below.
|Side||Case Number||Case Name||Attorney||Law Firm||Testify|
|Pln||C-1686-87 AWT||Image Technical Service, Inc. et al. v. Eastman Kodak Company||Maxwell M. Blecher||Blecher & Collins||Depo / Trial|
|Pln||05 C 3545||Eaton Power Quality Corporation v. J.T. Packard & Associates, Inc.||Joseph F. Cleveland||Brackett & Ellis|
|Pln||C 03-05566 -JCS||CSL, L.L.C. v. Imperial Building Products, Inc.||Marc M. Gorelnik||Townsend and Townsend and Crew|
|Pln||SACV07-0883 JVS (FFMx)||Nationwide Power Solutions, Inc., et al. v. Eaton Electrical, Inc.||Maxwell M. Blecher||Blecher & Collins|
|Pln||CV 06-2626 GW (JTLx)||Plush Lounge Las Vegas, LLC v. Hotspur Resorts Nevada, Inc.||John C. Kirkland||Dreier Stein & Kahan|
|Pln||CV06-01644||Radiology Consultants, Inc. v. Washoe Health System, Inc., et al.||Kent R. Robison||Robison, Belaustegui, Sharp & Low||Depo|
Key Representative Engagement
Image Technical Service, Inc., et al. v. Eastman Kodak Company (Maxwell M. Blecher — Blecher & Collins). Mr. Neches testified as an expert in United States District Court, Northern District of California, on behalf of plaintiffs in this antitrust matter. The plaintiffs, eleven independent service organizations, contended that Kodak’s refusal to sell them parts for Kodak photocopier and micrographic equipment allowed Kodak to monopolize the servicing of its equipment and restrained competition in refurbishing and selling used equipment. Mr. Neches testified regarding his calculations of each plaintiff’s damages. Result: the jury awarded ten plaintiffs $23,948,300, which was trebled under antitrust law to $71,844,900. The United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, affirmed as to all liability issues, affirmed services damages awarded to nine of the ten ISO’s and remanded for new trial used equipment damages. The United States Supreme Court denied review of the Ninth Circuit decision. The remaining issues were appealed and subsequently settled. (Click here for more information.)
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THOMAS NECHES DIRECTLY AT 213.624.8150.CONTACT US