Facts

United National Maintenance Inc. (UNM) filed suit against San Diego Convention Center Corporation Inc. ("SDCCC"), alleging violations of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, California's unfair competition law, and interference with contract and prospective economic advantage.

SDCCC manages the San Diego Convention Center under contract with the City of San Diego. SDCCC is wholly owned by the City. The parties were direct competitors for the provision of event-related cleaning services at the convention center.

According to UNM, SDCCC engaged in anti-competitive conduct and interfered with UNM's contracts and business opportunities by modifying the convention center's policies governing cleaning services, which had the effect of excluding UNM from the convention center. UNM sought injunctive relief, treble compensatory damages, disgorgement, punitive damages and attorney's fees.

On March 21, 2011, the case proceeded to trial on UNM's claims on actual monopolization under Sherman Act section 2; attempted monopolization Sherman Act section 2; intentional interference with contract; and intentional interference with prospective economic relations.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
SDCC denied the alleged antitrust violations and the contract claims, and asserted various affirmative defenses, including business justification and antitrust under the State Action Doctrine and the Local Government Antitrust Act.

Result

After deliberating for nearly two weeks in May 2011, the jury returned a unanimous verdict in favor of UNM on its interference with contract claim, awarding damages of $668,905. The jury was not able to reach a verdict on UNM's Sherman Act section 2 and interference with prospective economic advantage claims. Sixteen months after the verdict was rendered, the Court granted SDCCC's post-trial motions and denied UNM's request for permanent injunctive relief, ruling as a matter of law that SDCCC was immune from antitrust liability under the State Action Doctrine; SDCCC was immune from antitrust damages under the Local Government Antitrust Act; UNM failed to prove that SDCCC had monopoly power in the relevant market for trade show cleaning services in the San Diego region; UNM failed to prove SDCCC acquired or maintained monopoly power generally or pursuant to the "essential facilities" doctrine; UNM's intentional interference with contract claim failed because SDCCC was not a stranger to UNM's contracts for cleaning services at the convention center, and therefore, did not owe UNM a tort duty not to interfere; and UNM's intentional interference with prospective economic advantage claim failed because UNM failed to prove the predicate Sherman Act section 2 claims. UNM has appealed the ruling.

Other Information

The Court also excluded any evidence on punitive damages based on the earlier finding that SDCCC was a government entity. FILING DATE: Nov. 13, 2007.

Deliberation

two weeks

Length

five weeks