Monday, March 16, 2009
University of Florida Levin College of Law Student Wins ABA Antitrust Section Writing Prize for note "Does a Cartel Aim Expressly? Trusting Calder Personal Jurisdiction When Antitrust Goes Global"
Posted by D. Daniel Sokol
I am happy to announce that the winner of the ABA Antitrust Section writing prize for the best antitrust note written by a law school student is our own Larry Dougherty. Larry is the outgoing Editor in Chief of the Florida Law Review, and is scheduled to receive his J.D. from the University of Florida Levin College of Law in May 2009. After graduation, Larry will clerk for the Honorable Charles R. Wilson of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. While in law school, Larry worked as a research assistant for Bill Page, helping to update Kintner’s Federal Antitrust Law.
Larry will be awarded his prize at the spring meeting in another two weeks.
Larry won for his note Does a Cartel Aim Expressly? Trusting Calder Personal Jurisdiction When Antitrust Goes Global.
ABSTRACT: In recent years, plaintiffs have stepped up their use of the effects test from the 1984 Supreme Court case of Calder v. Jones to obtain personal jurisdiction over antitrust defendants. Under this theory, defendants may be haled into a forum, despite a lack of traditional contacts, because of anticompetitive effects that they expressly aimed at that forum. A review of the caselaw shows that although this theory works well with some types of antitrust allegations, the Calder analogy weakens when charges of broad-based anticompetitive conduct collide with the long-arm statutes of particular states. While at least one case attacking international price-fixing contains ample allegations of express aiming sufficient to satisfy the effects test, the Vitamins Antitrust litigation showed that the heightened requirements of various states' long-arm statutes precluded findings of Calder jurisdiction. The Note concludes with a review of public policy arguments that support a broader application of Calder to antitrust cases.