Federal courts across the United States have
recognized and commended Berger & Montague's legal skills
and extraordinary success in antitrust class actions.
Berger & Montague's antitrust lawyers are
often recognized by federal courts for their ability to
develop, guide and settle extremely large and complex antitrust
class actions. Some examples of remarks noting the skill,
efficiency and expertise of our attorneys are below:
"Class Counsel did their work
on their own with enormous attention to detail and unflagging
devotion to the cause. Many of the issues in this litigation
... were unique and issues of first impression."
"Class Counsel provided
extraordinarily high-quality representation. This case raised a
number of unique and complex legal issues ... [Class Counsel] were
indefatigable. They represented the Class with a high degree of
professionalism, and vigorously litigated every issue against some
of the ablest lawyers in the antitrust defense bar." In
re Currency Conversion Fee Antitrust Litig., 263 F.R.D.
110 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) ($336 million settlement).
From The Hon. Jan E. DuBois of the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania:
"[T]he size of the settlements
in absolute terms and expressed as a percentage of total damages
evidence a high level of skill by petitioners … The Court has
repeatedly stated that the lawyering in the case at every stage was
superb, and does so again." In re
Linerboard Antitrust Litig., 2004 WL 1221350, at *5-6
(E.D. Pa. 2004) ($202 million settlement).
From The Hon. Nancy G. Edmunds of the U.S. District Court for
the Eastern District of Michigan:
"[T]his represents an
excellent settlement for the Class and reflects the outstanding
effort on the part of highly experienced, skilled, and hard working
Class Counsel…. [T]heir efforts were not only successful, but were
highly organized and efficient in addressing numerous complex
issues raised in this litigation[.]" In re Cardizem CD
Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1278 (E.D. Mich. 2002) ($110
From The Hon. Charles P. Kocoras of the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of Illinois:
"The stakes were high here,
with the result that most matters of consequence were contested.
There were numerous trips to the courthouse, and the path to the
trial court and the Court of Appeals frequently traveled. The
efforts of counsel for the class has [sic] produced a substantial
recovery, and it is represented that the cash settlement alone is
the second largest in the history of class action
litigation.... There is no question that the results achieved
by class counsel were extraordinary[.]" In
re Brand Name Prescription Drugs Antitrust Litig., 2000
U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1734, at *4-6 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 9, 2000) ($717
From The Hon. Peter J. Messitte of the U.S. District Court for
the District of Maryland:
"Obviously, high skill was
required to perform the services here, and I'll revisit the issue
of experience and ability in a moment, but this was not the kind of
case that an average lawyer without special skill in the class
action anti-trust field, it seems to me, could handle;"
"The experience and ability of
the attorneys I have mentioned earlier, in my view in reviewing the
documents, which I have no reason to doubt, the plaintiffs' counsel
are at the top of the profession in this regard and certainly have
used their expertise to craft an extremely favorable settlement for
their clients …" Spawd, Inc. and General Generics v.
Bolar Pharmaceutical Co., Inc., CA No. PJM-92-3624 (stated
in a Settlement Approval Hearing, Oct. 28, 1994).
From The Hon. Donald W. Van Artsdalen of the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania:
"As to the quality of the work
performed, although that would normally be reflected in the not
immodest hourly rates of all attorneys, for which one would expect
to obtain excellent quality work at all times, the results of the
settlements speak for themselves. Despite the extreme uncertainties
of trial, plaintiffs' counsel were able to negotiate a cash
settlement of a not insubstantial sum, and in addition, by way of
equitable relief, substantial concessions by the defendants which,
subject to various conditions, will afford the right, at least, to
lessee‑dealers to obtain gasoline supply product from major oil
companies and suppliers other than from their respective lessors.
The additional benefits obtained for the classes by way of
equitable relief would, in and of itself, justify some upward
adjustment of the lodestar figure." Bogosian v. Gulf Oil
Corp., 621 F. Supp. 27, 31 (E.D. Pa. 1985) ($35 million
From The Hon. M. Joseph Blumenfeld, Chief Judge of the U.S.
District Court of Connecticut:
"The work of the Berger firm
showed a high degree of efficiency and imagination, particularly in
the maintenance and management of the national class
actions." In re Master Key
Antitrust Litig., 1977 U.S. Dist LEXIS 12948, at *35
(Nov. 4, 1977) ($21 million settlement).
From The Hon. Robert B. Krupansky, who first served on the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Ohio and then on the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit:
Finally, the court
unhesitatingly concludes that the quality of the representation
rendered by counsel was uniformly high. The attorneys involved in
this litigation are extremely experienced and skilled in their
prosecution of antitrust litigation and other complex actions.
Their services have been rendered in an efficient and expeditious
manner, but have nevertheless been productive of a highly favorable
result. In re Art
Materials Antitrust Litig., 1984 CCH Trade Cases ¶
65,815 (N.D. Ohio 1983) ($7.5 million settlement).
Contact Us To Learn More
We invite you to learn more about our
Antitrust Group. Berger & Montague welcomes referrals from
other law firms and attorneys. For more information or to schedule
a confidential discussion about a potential case, please fill out
the contact form on the right, email us at email@example.com, or contact an Antitrust
Group shareholder. We are available to evaluate potential antitrust
cases without charge.