Firms vie for class leadership in gas price antitrust litigation

SAN FRANCISCO -- U.S. Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Corley urged plaintiffs' lawyers on Friday to work with the state attorney general and to maximize efficiency when choosing interim lead counsel in consolidated antitrust litigation accusing two energy trading firms of scheming to artificially inflate gasoline prices in California.

"Given what we're facing as a country right now in terms of the economy, it's even more important that we're mindful of conserving resources," Corley said. "And of course there's the attorney general action in state court. I want to know what your plans are to coordinate with that litigation to avoid duplication."

The lawsuits filed in federal court in San Francisco piggyback on a case filed by the state's top prosecutor claiming Vitol Inc. and SK Energy Americas took advantage of market disruptions following a 2015 explosion at a Torrance refinery to drive up and maintain inflated gasoline prices by engaging in sham trades. In re: California Gasoline Spot Market Antitrust Litigation, 20-cv-03131 (N.D. Cal., filed May 6, 2020).

With more than a dozen firms vying for leadership positions, attorneys had five minutes during the Friday Zoom video hearing to argue in support of their applications.

Samantha Stein of Hausfeld noted that her firm represents the first-filed plaintiff in the case and has been leading case management efforts. In addition to filing all the motions to relate subsequently filed cases in the Northern District, she said her firm conferred with defense counsel to obtain waivers of service for other plaintiffs' attorneys so they do not have to serve defendants with notice of the lawsuits.

Stein proposed that Hausfeld, along with Girard Sharp LLP, lead the litigation. Given there are only two primary defendants, she argued a streamlined leadership structure, which she said has largely been adopted by the Northern District in similar antitrust cases, would be most efficient.

"There doesn't need to be an army of plaintiffs' lawyers," she said.

Girard Sharp partner Dena Sharp argued a smaller team is vital "so we have crisp decision-making" with the state attorney general.

Fresh off of a landmark $575 million settlement and extensive injunctive relief on the eve of trial in an antitrust case against Sutter Health, Sarah Grossman-Swenson of McCracken Stemerman argued her firm, with Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll and Pillsbury & Coleman, lead the litigation. She guaranteed that the same attorneys who spent the last six years working on state Cartwright Act claims, California's antitrust law, in that case would work this one as well.

Noting every firm seeking leadership positions has deep class action and antitrust experience, Judith Zahid of Zelle LLP emphasized her firm's focus on diversity. She said half of the firm's attorneys are women and one-third are minorities.

"We have women running the antitrust offices," she said.

Keeping up with a trend notable in the Northern District of judges insisting on increased diversity, U.S. District Judge James Donato in July refused to appoint an all-men team of interim lead attorneys in consolidated litigation by users of the Robinhood Market app who say they could not access their accounts on a busy trading day.

"Leadership roles should be made available to newer and less experienced lawyers, and the attorneys running this litigation should reflect the diversity of the proposed national class," Donato wrote.

Other firms seeking leadership positions in this case include Berman Tabacco, Robins Kaplan LLP and Labaton Sucharow LLP.