A federal civil jury came back after deliberating for five hours on Monday and said there was not enough evidence against the owner of Macy's department stores to prove a price-fixing conspiracy in the high-end tableware market. Antitrust attorneys say the verdict was remarkable if only because the case made it all the way to trial. Usually, said lawyers on both sides of the bar, a combination of sky-high financial risks and the prospect of criminal prosecution is enough to encourage a settlement.
July 05, 2007 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
A federal civil jury came back after deliberating for five hours on Monday and said there was not enough evidence against the owner of Macy’s department stores to prove a price-fixing conspiracy in the high-end tableware market.
Antitrust attorneys say the verdict was remarkable if only because the case made it all the way to trial.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
