Antitrust and Consumer Protection
Competition: Fall 2014, Vol. 23, No. 2
Content
- "All Natural" Class Actions: a Plaintiff Perspective
- Appellate Courts Grapple With the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act—Plaintiffs' Perspective
- Cafa: Recent Developments On the Jurisdictional and Settlement Fronts
- Chair's Column
- Defense Perspective: "All Natural" Class Actions
- Editor's Note
- Federal and State Class Antitrust Actions Should Not Be Tried In a Single Trial
- Ftc V. Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, Et Al. and the Ftc's Authority To Regulate Companies' Data Security Practices
- Joint Trial of Direct and Indirect Purchaser Claims
- Masthead
- Plaintiff Perspective: the Long Arm of State Antitrust Law
- Recoveries For Violations of Federal and California Antitrust Statutes Should Not Be Apportioned
- So Your Suppliers Conspired Against You: An Antitrust Class Action Opt-out Primer
- The Ftaia Limits the Extraterritorial Reach of State Antitrust Laws
- The Misapplication of Associated General Contractors To Cartwright Act Claims
- The Problem of Duplicative Recovery Under Federal and State Antitrust Law
- Why Associated General Contractors Should Be Used To Assess Standing In Cartwright Act Cases
WHY ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS SHOULD BE USED TO ASSESS STANDING IN CARTWRIGHT ACT CASES
By Anna M. Fabish1
I. INTRODUCTION
Courts are far from united in evaluating antitrust standing for indirect purchasers under California’s antitrust laws—an inconsistency the California Supreme Court has yet to address. The solution, however, has been available for decades: the multi-factor analysis set forth by the United States Supreme Court in Associated General Contractors v. Cal. State Council of Carpenters ("AGC").2 The decision provides a nuanced framework for assessing antitrust standing in all Cartwright Act claims, including—indeed, especially—claims by indirect purchasers.
The underlying principles of AGC, as well as the results of courts applying the AGC factors to Cartwright Act claims to date,3 reveal that AGC and the Cartwright Act are consistent and complementary sources of law. AGC is persuasive federal precedent that can—and, in the interest of helping courts navigate the complex questions of antitrust standing for indirect purchasers, should—be applied to Cartwright Act claims.