Menu
Blog Banner Image

The Franchise Memorandum

Second Circuit Holds That de Minimis Lost Sales Are Insufficient to Establish Price Discrimination
Posted in Antitrust

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has affirmed summary judgment in a price discrimination case in which the plaintiffs were unable to show a significant loss of customers. Cash Sr Henderson Drugs v. Johnson & Johnson, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15162 (2d Cir. Aug. 27, 2015). The case arose because Johnson & Johnson, a pharmaceutical manufacturer, offered rebates and discounts to certain "favored purchasers," resulting in higher prices for retail pharmacies for the same drugs. Because Johnson & Johnson did not contest that it sold name-brand drugs to different buyers at different prices, the court's analysis came down to whether this activity had a prohibited effect on competition. To overcome previous evidentiary failures, the plaintiff pharmacies conducted a court-supervised study to determine how many customers were actually lost to the "favored purchasers" over a 12-year period. The study showed exceedingly few customers had been lost, so the district court granted summary judgment.

Noting the high cost of antitrust litigation and its potential chilling effect on the market as a whole, the Second Circuit affirmed. As the court observed, substantial harm and the threat of substantial harm were necessary elements of the pharmacies' claims. Because the study clearly demonstrated the number of diverted sales was de minimis, the pharmacies were missing the "hallmark" of competitive injury. Moreover, the Second Circuit concluded that pharmacies could not benefit from any inference of harm arising from the discounts over a long period of time because any such inference was rebutted by the actual evidence in this case.

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook

The information contained in this post is provided to alert you to legal developments and should not be considered legal advice. It is not intended to and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Specific questions about how this information affects your particular situation should be addressed to one of the individuals listed. No representations or warranties are made with respect to this information, including, without limitation, as to its completeness, timeliness, or accuracy, and Lathrop GPM shall not be liable for any decision made in connection with the information. The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely on advertisements.

About this Publication

The Franchise Memorandum is a collection of postings on summaries of recent legal developments of interest to franchisors brought to you by Lathrop GPM LLP. 

To subscribe to monthly emails for The Franchise Memorandum, please click here

Topics

Archives

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

Blog Authors