Kemp & Associates, Inc. and its vice-president and part owner Daniel J. Mannix, were indicted on August 17, 2016 in the District of Utah on a single-count conspiracy to violate the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, by engaging in a customer allocation agreement. The agreement at issue was a set of guidelines which governed the joint activity between defendants and co-conspirators. On March 31, 2017, the defendants filed a Motion for Order that the case be Subject to the Rule of Reason and to Dismiss the Indictment as time barred on Statute of Limitations grounds. On August 29, 2017, the district court affirmed an earlier ruling that the indictment would be tried under the Rule of Reason, but then made that ruling moot by dismissing the case on statute of limitations grounds. The court ruled that the conspiracy ended three years outside the statute of limitations. In a nutshell, the court found the conspiracy ended when the last customer was allocated, while the government argued, unsuccessfully, that the conspiracy continued while the defendants reaped the supra competitive profits from allocating the customers. The government’s “payment theory” usually prevails, but not in this case.
When I have time, I’d like to comment on the court’s ruling but for now I simply provide the ruling (US v. Kemp & Associates, Inc and Daniel J. Mannix) for your perusal.
Thanks for reading.
P.S. Want to write a guest post? The pay stinks but contributors welcome.