The US Supreme Court holds that mere parallel conduct in a complaint is insufficient to state a claim of conspiracy under the Sherman Act (Bell Atlantic / Twombly)

In antitrust, the Supreme Court is on a roll. After giving scant attention to antitrust cases over the last two decades, the Supreme Court has now issued five substantive antitrust decisions in the last 17 months-one of the most intense periods of antitrust activity in the Court's history. And the trend of these decisions is clear: Without exception, each has made it tougher on antitrust plaintiffs in some way. The aggregate net effect on future antitrust litigation may well be quite significant. The most recent decision, Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, has the potential to have the most practical importance of all these recent decisions, with potential implications for all federal civil actions. If the lower courts seize on the freedom that the Supreme Court has given them to

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Authors

Quotation

John M. Majoras, Robert A. Schmoll, The US Supreme Court holds that mere parallel conduct in a complaint is insufficient to state a claim of conspiracy under the Sherman Act (Bell Atlantic / Twombly), 21 May 2007, e-Competitions May 2007, Art. N° 33823

Visites 883

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues