Antitrust / 2021
California
Richmond Compassionate Care Collective — Cannabis Antitrust
Won an antitrust verdict in the cannabis industry in California on behalf of Richmond Compassionate Care Collective, noted as having substantial impact on cases in any state that legalizes cannabis sales.
Antitrust / 2016
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of CA
TFT v. LCD Indirect Purchasers
Consumers brought action against Japanese, Korean, and Taiwanese companies for the price-fixing of flat panels, resulting in the largest all-cash settlement in favor of consumers — a combined $1.1 billion paid to consumers in 24 states and Washington, D.C., the largest collection ever in a consumer antitrust class action.
Antitrust / 2007
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of CA
Reilly v. Hearst Corporation
The Alioto Law Firm represented Clint Reilly in a private antitrust challenge to the Hearst Corporation's acquisition of the San Francisco Chronicle and its subsequent transactions with MediaNews Group concerning Bay Area newspapers. The litigation, originally filed in 2000, sought to preserve editorial competition in one of the country's largest metropolitan newspaper markets and produced one of the most closely watched newspaper-antitrust matters of its era. Resolved in 2007 through a comprehensive settlement preserving newspaper competition in the Bay Area.
Lender Liability / 2014
Hawaii Supreme Court
Lahaina Fashions v. Bank of Hawaii
The Alioto Law Firm represented Lahaina Fashions against Bank of Hawai'i and Hawaiian Trust Company for fraud and lender-liability conduct connected to financing of a Maui retail enterprise. The Hawaii Supreme Court's opinion clarified the standards for fraud claims arising out of lender conduct in the state. Established precedent on fraud and lender liability in Hawai'i.
Predatory Lending / 1991
California Superior Court
Latian v. Banco do Brasil
The Alioto Law Firm represented borrowers against Banco do Brasil for abusive credit practices that stripped equity from small enterprises and individual customers. The case helped establish the framework later relied upon in modern predatory lending litigation against major financial institutions. One of the first predatory lending cases ever tried in the United States. The jury returned a $28 million verdict.
Antitrust / 1982
U.S. District Court for the Central District of CA
Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Commission v. NFL (Raiders)
The Oakland Raiders sought to relocate from Oakland to Los Angeles, but the NFL's other club owners voted to block the move. The Alioto Law Firm successfully challenged that veto under the antitrust laws. The jury awarded the Raiders $11.55 million and the Los Angeles Coliseum $4.86 million; trebled under federal antitrust law, the combined total reached a $49 million verdict — establishing the legality for professional sports teams to change markets and leave a city without league approval.
Antitrust / 1982
U.S. District Court
Forro Precision, Inc. v. IBM
Forro Precision, Inc. was a major manufacturer of precision instruments used by peripheral manufacturers of computer equipment that were suppressed by IBM. All other plaintiffs were represented by defense counsel, who were unsuccessful in their claims against IBM. Hung juries were the result in most other cases. The Courts used this hung jury situation to claim that juries did not have the capacity to understand these complex litigations. Alioto was the only plaintiff's attorney to win a jury verdict against IBM for this conduct. The jury awarded $2.8 million.
Antitrust / 1977
U.S. District Court
Kaplan v. Burroughs
A landmark computer-industry antitrust case widely regarded as a precursor to the personal computer era. The Alioto Law Firm represented a small business competitor against Burroughs Corporation's efforts to eliminate independent rivals from the computer processing market. It remains the only case of its era in which a major computer manufacturer was held liable for attempting to suppress small business competition. The jury returned a verdict of $4.5 million.
Antitrust / 1980
U.S. District Court — affirmed on appeal, 1982
Dimmitt v. CPC International
Independent corn wet millers brought antitrust claims against CPC International for conduct that suppressed competition in the corn wet milling industry. The Alioto Law Firm tried the case for the plaintiffs and successfully defended the verdict on appeal. The jury returned a $4.5 million verdict, affirmed on appeal in 1982.
Antitrust / 1979
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, Fourth Division
McDonald (Stimtech) v. Johnson & Johnson
Entrepreneurs brought suit against Johnson & Johnson for the suppression of TENS devices to benefit Tylenol. The jury awarded plaintiffs $56.87 million for violation of the antitrust act, automatically tripled under the Sherman Act to $170.4 million — the largest antitrust judgment up to that time.
Antitrust / 1975
California Superior Court
Metropolitan News v. Daily Journal
Resulted in a multi-million dollar settlement in addition to the Order by the Court for the 110 newspapers in Los Angeles County to divest their interest and their participation on the Board of Directors of the LA Daily Journal.
Antitrust / 1975
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of CA
Bray v. Safeway Stores, Inc., et al.
Cattlemen brought action against the three largest retail grocery chains for price-fixing. After six weeks of trial, the jury found A&P in violation of antitrust laws; the largest food retailer in the United States was fined $32.5 million, automatically trebled to $32,712,081 — the largest judgment in the antitrust laws up to that time.
A partial lists — additional cases available on request.