Jason S. Hartley

Hartley opened the doors of Hartley LLP in 2018. His six-lawyer firm represents plaintiffs in commercial contingency matters such as antitrust, class action and unfair competition claims. He was formerly a partner at Stueve Siegel Hanson LLP.

"I'm no longer sharing the risks and the rewards," he said of his newly independent status.

Earlier this month, Hartley filed a new antitrust class action over allegations of Sherman Act violations by major meat processing and packing companies. The defendants sold about 80% of the more than 25 million pounds of fresh and frozen beef supplied to the U.S. market, according to his complaint. Samuels v. Cargill Inc., 20-CV01319 (D. Minn., filed June 6, 2020).

"Since at least the start of 2015, Defendants have exploited their market power in this highly concentrated market by conspiring to limit the supply of, and to fix the prices of, beef sold to [plaintiff] Central Grocers and others in the U.S. wholesale market," the complaint states.

Harley's case is one of several targeting the beef industry.

"The cattle farmers filed their case over allegations that the packers kept prices artificially low. We say the goal of the defendants was to sell high," he said, adding that the actions are likely to be coordinated before the same federal judge for purposes of discovery and to avoid inconsistent rulings.

Adding heft to his claims, he believes, is a parallel investigation of the industry by federal prosecutors. "It will have an impact on the viability of our complaint at the motion to dismiss stage."

Hartley is an executive committee member for plaintiffs in a 2019 $5.5 billion settlement in In re: Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation, 05-MD1740 (E.D. N.Y., filed Dec. 13, 2013).

He served in the same role in In re: Capacitors Antitrust Litigation, 17-MD02801 (N.D. Ca., filed Dec. 5, 2017). In that case, settlements to date have totaled more than $300 million.

He was appointed co-lead counsel in a case stemming from a U.S. Department of Justice criminal investigation into price fixing of a polyurethane chemical ubiquitous in foam, plastics, adhesives and coatings. In re: Diisocyanates Antitrust Litigation, 18-MC01001 (W.D. Penn., filed Oct. 10, 2018).

"There was a big leadership fight in that one," Hartley said. "There were seven firms competing, and we emerged victorious. The others were all capable and experienced, but what I think helped me with the judge was that at oral argument I spoke a lot about my clients and how important this case was to them. My clients make consumer products from these raw materials and there is no other source, so when prices are artificially manipulated it really hurts."

I think the judge really appreciated my client focus," he added.

-- John Roemer