The U. S. Supreme Court’s decision in Illinois Brick Co. vs. Illinois bars indirect purchasers from seeking damages under federal law. But the Supreme Court has held that federal antitrust laws generally do not preempt suits for damages under state antitrust statutes. Several states have enacted so called ""Illinois Brick repealer"" statues that expressly permit indirect purchasers to maintain a claim for damages under the state’s antitrust act. Still other state courts have interpreted their state antitrust acts to permit such claims, even in the absence of a repealer amendment. Other states have specially adopted the holdings of Illinois Brick and preclude indirect purchasers from seeking damages under the state’s antitrust law. And a small number of states allow the attorney general of the state to sue parens patriae on behalf of the indirect purchasers.
This survey includes the statutes, case law, and practice on this topic for each of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and certain U.S. territories. It also discusses the remedies available under state antitrust and consumer protection laws, as well as the common law of unjust enrichment, the relevant statutes of limitations, and the availability of class actions. It provides a practical look at all issues relating to indirect purchaser litigation in a comprehensive and easy-to-read format.