William J. "Bill" Blechman
William “Bill” Blechman’s practice concentrates on antitrust law, predominately on the plaintiff’s side. An experienced trial lawyer, Bill typically represents the specific client interests as plaintiffs of large public and private companies and entrepreneurs. He does not engage in plaintiff’s class actions. In addition to his plaintiff’s practice, Bill defends companies in government investigations and antitrust class actions.
Bill’s antitrust practice focuses on dominant firm conduct and conspiracies (i.e., cartels) in restraint of trade. He has represented clients in a broad array of industries, including pharmaceuticals, manufacturing, retail and wholesale grocery, electronics, airlines, railroads, shipping, construction, beverages, telecommunications and electronic payments. Over the last 15 years, he has devoted considerable time to litigating the law and economics of two-sided electronic platform markets.
Bill has participated in the civil prosecution of more than 25 domestic or international conspiracies and been lead counsel in nearly all of the firm’s cartel cases. He assists multinational corporations in formulating and implementing measured and principled strategies to maximize recoveries in these cases. His cartel practice spans the United States, Europe and Asia, and involves proceedings incident to enforcement actions by the United States Department of Justice or foreign competition authorities.
Bill has represented an individual company, or group of companies, in the following federal antitrust direct (i.e., non-class) actions that are representative of the type and range of antitrust work that he has done and continues to do:
- He represented multinational automobile manufacturers in an antitrust action against their suppliers for conspiring to fix prices of ferroalloys.
- He represented national supermarket chains, drug store chains, a multinational rental car company, multinational cruise line companies, an airline, and national automotive supply firms in antitrust actions against the major 4-party payment card networks for conspiring not to compete and monopolization of certain markets.
- He represented national retailers in an antitrust action against the major 3-party payment card network for contracts in restraint of trade and monopolization of certain markets.
- He represented a multinational tire manufacturer in the prosecution of several international cartels involving key products in the company’s supply chain.
- He represented consumer products companies in a multidistrict antitrust case against the major integrated manufacturers of linerboard and corrugated boxes.
- He represented national chains with drug stores in an antitrust action against the manufacturers of generic drugs for conspiring to fix prices.
- He represented the Attorneys General of several States in prosecuting (or advising about) bid rigging cases involving dairy, road construction, and school bus contracts.
- He represented a low fare airline in a predatory pricing case against a legacy carrier. In the case, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled for the low fare carrier on its predation claims – a landmark decision with implications not just for the airline industry but for other industries as well. The decision is the only time that an airline has prevailed on a predation claim in an appellate court, and one of the few appellate decisions for a plaintiff on a predation claim.
- He represented national drug store chains in a price discrimination action against branded drug manufacturers.
- He represented a steel company in a multidistrict antitrust action against domestic and foreign suppliers of materials used to make steel.
- He represented national retailers in a multi-district antitrust action against the major producers of shelf-stable packaged seafood products for conspiring to fix prices.
- He represented national mattress manufacturers in a multidistrict antitrust action against their polyurethane foam suppliers for conspiring to fix prices.
- He represented a multi-national consumer products company in several multidistrict antitrust actions against suppliers for conspiring to fix prices of a number of food supplements.
- He represented another multinational consumer products company in a multidistrict antitrust action involving an international conspiracy to fix prices of a chemical used in consumer products.
- He represented six of the ten largest producers of vitamins for human consumption in the United States, including the largest such firm, in a multidistrict antitrust action concerning an international cartel of vitamin manufacturers.
- He represented a national retailer in an antitrust action against foreign manufacturers and their domestic distributors for conspiring to fix prices of a consumer electronics component.
- He represented multinational firms in an antitrust action against Jones Act shippers for conspiring to fix prices.
- He represented pulp and paper manufacturers, consumer products companies, and building materials companies in a multidistrict antitrust action against the major railroads for conspiring to fix prices.
- He represented supermarket and restaurant chains in an antitrust action against broiler chicken producers.
REPRESENTATIVE INDUSTRIES AND PRODUCTS SUBJECT TO ANTITRUST DIRECT (i.e. NON-CLASS) ACTIONS: telecommunications; electronic payments; airlines; construction; health care; pharmaceuticals; shipping; consumer products; transportation; construction; manufacturing; currency exchanges; citric acid; rubber processing chemicals; pork; vitamins; packaged seafood; ferrosilicon; broiler chickens; monosodium glutamate; polyurethane foam; pharmaceuticals; parcel tanker freight rates; cathode ray tubes; Jones Act shipping rates; nitrile rubber; hydrogen peroxide; ethylene propylene diene monomer; nucleotides; styrene butadiene rubber; sodium perborate; graphite electrodes; polychloroprene.
REPRESENTATIVE DIRECT (i.e. NON-CLASS) ACTION ANTITRUST CASES: General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Company and Chrysler Corporation v. Elkem Metals Co. etc. (W.D. Pa.); Unilever United States, Inc. v. Daicel Ltd. (N.D. Cal.); The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company v. Bayer AG (N.D. Oh.); Kroger Co., Safeway, Inc., etc. v. Visa USA, MasterCard International etc. (E.D.N.Y.); Spirit Airlines, Inc. v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. (E.D. Mich.); Leiner Health Products Co., NBTY Inc. etc. v. F. Hoffmann-LaRoche Ltd., etc. (D.D.C.); Republic Engineered Steels v. SGL Carbon AG etc. (E.D. Pa.); ConAgra Foods Co., etc. v. International Paper Co., etc. (W.D. Pa.); Reckitt Benckiser Inc. v. Solvay S.A., etc. (E.D. Pa.); Hy-Vee etc. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield (N.D. Ala.); Sealy Corp, Serta, Simmons Bedding, Tempur-Pedic, La-Z-Boy etc. v. Carpenter Co. etc. (N.D. Oh.); State of Michigan ex rel. Frank Kelly v. Hoekstra Bus Co. etc. (W.D. Mich.); Ad-Vantage Telephone Directory Consultants, Inc. v. GTE Directories Corporation (M.D. Fla.); Walgreen Co., Albertson’s et al. v. American Express (S.D.N.Y.); Sears v. Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd. (N.D. Cal.); US Foods etc. v. Smithfield Foods etc. (D. Mn.); Kraft Heinz, UPM Kymmene, Cemex etc. v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. etc. (D.D.C.).
While antitrust work dominates his practice, Bill has a niche practice representing whistleblowers in claims brought under the Federal or a State False Claims Act. These cases place a premium on coordination with Federal and State law enforcement agencies. He has represented whistleblowers, as relators (or plaintiffs), in False Claims Act cases in the defense, health care, and education industries.Bill has taught pretrial procedure and practice at a law school, lectured and published papers on antitrust law, and taught semi
- Chambers USA, Band 1, Antitrust, 2004 – present
- Best Lawyers in America, Antitrust Law, 2006 – present
- Florida Super Lawyers, Top Rated Antitrust Litigation Attorney, 2007 – present
- AV® Preeminent™ Peer Review RatedSM by Martindale-Hubbell®
- South Florida Legal Guide, Top Lawyers, Antitrust, 2021
Miami, Florida 33131
