Barry's Cut Rate Stores, Inc. v. Visa, Inc.

2019 WL 7584728 (2019)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Barry’s Cut Rate Stores, Inc. v. Visa, Inc.

United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York
2019 WL 7584728 (2019)

Facts

Visa, Inc. and Mastercard (defendants) operated networks for payment cards. The banks initially were owned by their member banks, but both were publicly owned by 2008. A putative class of nationwide merchants, including Barry’s Cut Rate Stores, Inc. (collectively, merchants) (plaintiffs), sued Visa, Mastercard, and various issuing and acquiring banks (collectively, banks) (collectively, defendants) for violating federal and California antitrust law. Issuing banks were banks that provided customers with Visa or Mastercard credit or debit cards. Acquiring banks were banks that served as intermediaries between merchants and issuing banks. The merchants’ complaint centered on allegedly collectively fixed, supracompetitive interchange fees that merchants were required to pay when customers used Visa or Mastercard cards. Per the merchants, such fees were supported by various anticompetitive network rules, which included the honor-all-cards rule (requiring merchants that accepted Visa or Mastercard cards to accept all such branded cards, allegedly precluding merchants from negotiating better terms) and several rules that prevented merchants from steering customers to particular cards or payment methods. In addition, the merchants cited the fact that before Visa and Mastercard went public, their member banks served on the Visa and Mastercard boards and that, even after Visa and Mastercard went public, the former member banks allegedly retained great board influence and representation. The merchants sought a declaratory judgment that the banks’ conduct violated antitrust law and an injunction prohibiting the banks’ misconduct going forward. The banks moved to dismiss the merchants’ claims for lack of standing and for failure to state a claim. Per the banks, industry changes since the merchants first sued (such as Visa and Mastercard having gone public, settlements with regulators, and statutory changes) sufficiently resolved the merchants’ grievances such that the merchants’ claims were hypothetical or contingent.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Brodie, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership