In re Rail Freight Surcharge Antitrust Litigation
United States District Court for the District of Columbia
258 F.R.D. 167 (2009)
- Written by Mary Phelan D'Isa, JD
Facts
Eighteen putative plaintiff-class members, businesses from multiple districts (businesses) (plaintiffs), sought discovery during the class-action certification phase of their lawsuit against the four largest Class I railroads in the United States (railroads) (defendants). The lawsuit alleged that the railroads conspired to fix prices for rail-freight-transportation services through artificially high surcharges and that this violated federal antitrust laws. The railroads proposed a case-management order to bifurcate class-certification discovery from merits discovery. The railroads argued that phased discovery would facilitate early resolution of the class-certification question and reduce the burden of later merits discovery. The businesses proposed an alternative order that provided for class certification at the conclusion of all fact discovery. The businesses argued that class certification and merits evidence were indistinguishable.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Facciola, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 825,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 990 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.
