Firm Overview

Areas of Practice

Attorneys

Representative Clients
Paul E. Slater, Partner and Founder

Mr. Slater has been a partner at Sperling & Slater since he co-founded the firm in 1976, prior to which he was a member of the faculty at the University of California School of Law (Boalt Hall) in Berkeley, California, as well as a Professor of Law at the Northwestern University School of Law. As a full-time faculty member at Northwestern for five years, Mr. Slater taught the basic antitrust courses, and supervised student senior research projects in antitrust law. While he has been practicing law full-time since 1977, Mr. Slater has remained an Adjunct Professor of Law at Northwestern, and continues to teach the advanced antitrust courses. He is also a member of the Advisory Boards of the American Antitrust Institute and the Loyola Antitrust Institute.

Education

J.D., magna cum laude, class valedictorian, Order of the Coif, Northwestern University School of Law, 1970 (Editorial Board, Northwestern University Law Review)

B.A. in Economics, Columbia University, 1967

Representative Matters

Mr. Slater’s practice focuses on complex commercial litigation and counseling, with a heavy emphasis in antitrust law, to which he devotes approximately 70% of his time. His other areas of focus include trademarks, patents and unfair competition. A sampling of his representations follows:

Antitrust
Mr. Slater has received favorable judgments on behalf of numerous antitrust plaintiffs and defendants in both private treble-damage and injunction actions. Among others:

Mr. Slater successfully obtained, and sustained on appeal, an award of treble damages and injunctive relief for his client, a patent defendant and antitrust counterclaimant, on the basis of fraud on the Patent Office, bad faith prosecution of an infringement claim and predatory product modification under Section 2 of the Sherman Act. C.R. Bard v. M3 Systems, Inc., 157 F.3d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 1998). The case represents the first time in the history of the Sherman Act that a plaintiff prevailed on the basis of a predatory product modification claim under Section 2 of the Sherman Act in a fully-litigated case (i.e., successfully tried and sustained on appeal).

Mr. Slater successfully represented several nationwide retail chains in their §1 Sherman Act suits for price fixing against major manufacturers and obtained substantial monetary relief in a Sherman Act §1 price-fixing claim against all of the major brand name prescription drug manufacturers in the United States. See, In re Brand Name Prescription Drug Litigation, 123 F.3d 599 (7th Cir. 1997).

Mr. Slater successfully prosecuted breach of contract and Sherman Act §1 and §2 claims on behalf of a manufacturer and distributor of commercial vehicles, obtaining substantial monetary relief for his client. Bering Truck Corp. v. Hyundai Motor Co. and DaimlerChrysler Corp., District Court for the Western District of Virginia, Case No. 5:01 CV 56 (2005).

Mr. Slater obtained a treble-damage verdict at trial, which was sustained on appeal, against the owners of the Chicago Bulls NBA basketball franchise and the Chicago Stadium Corporation for violations of §1 and §2 of the Sherman Act. Fishman v. Estate of Wirtz, 807 F.2d 520 (7th Cir. 1986).

Mr. Slater obtained a verdict at trial which he successfully sustained on appeal in Wilk v. American Medical Association et. al., 895 F.2d 352 (7th Cir. 1990). Mr. Slater represented chiropractic plaintiffs against nine medical associations including the AMA, American College of Surgeons, American College of Radiologists, American Hospital Association and American College of Physicians, for conspiring to eliminate the entire chiropractic profession in violation of §1 and §2 of the Sherman Act.

In T. Harris Young and Associates, Inc. v. Marquette Electronics, Inc., 931 F.2d 816 (11th Cir. 1991), Mr. Slater successfully obtained reversal of a treble-damage judgment issued against a medical equipment manufacturer pursuant to §1 of the Sherman Act and on remand successfully obtained a judgment of dismissal for default from the trial court.

In In re Lease Oil Antitrust Litigation (II), Randolph Energy, Inc. v. Amerada Hess, et al., No. C-98-48 (1999), United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Corpus Christi Division, Mr. Slater obtained substantial treble-damage and injunctive relief for plaintiff land owners who leased mineral rights to oil company defendants who fixed the royalty rate paid to land owners in violation of the antitrust laws.

In Hewitt v. Joyce Beverages of Wisconsin, et. al., 721 F.2d 625 (7th Cir. 1983), Mr. Slater successfully defended class action price-fixing claims against the largest 7-UP® bottler in the United States.

Intellectual Property
Mr. Slater successfully defended at trial an accused patent infringer and obtained substantial monetary relief based on a Sherman Act §2 counterclaim for monopolization, asserting that the unsuccessful patent plaintiff, Westinghouse, tied the purchase of replacement heat exchangers used in nuclear energy plants to the purchase of enriched uranium. Westinghouse Corp. v. Southwestern Engineering Co.

ERISA
Mr. Slater successfully litigated as co-lead counsel, at trial and on appeal, an ERISA class action on behalf of a class of retirees, recovering $52 million for the plaintiff class. Rybarczyk, et. al. v. TRW, Inc., 235 F.3d 975 (6th Cir. 2000).

Publications and Speaking Engagements
Mr. Slater has authored a number of law review articles which have been favorably cited by the United States Supreme Court on three different occasions in Hospital Building Co. v. Trustees of Rex Hospital, et al., 425 U.S. 738, 743 (1976); Cantor v. Detroit Edison Co., 428 U.S. 579, 632 (1976); and City of Lafayette, Louisiana, et al. v. Louisiana Power & Light Co., 435 U.S. 389, 401 (1978). At the request of the Department of Justice Antitrust Division, Mr. Slater testified before the National Commission for the Revision of Antitrust Laws with regard to the need and proposals for amending the antitrust laws of the United States. Mr. Slater has also authored amicus briefs on behalf of antitrust organizations. Recently, he authored an amicus brief on behalf of the American Antitrust Institute in In Re Cardizem CD Antitrust Litigation on the subject of the overlap between the patent and antitrust laws. See 332 F.3d 896 (6th Cir. 2003). He has also appeared as a frequent speaker at national antitrust conferences, including the ABA Antitrust Section annual meeting, the Corporate Counsel Institute, the New York Antitrust Law Symposium, the Indiana Continuing Legal Education Seminar, and the antitrust and patent committees of the Chicago Bar Association.

Paul E. Slater
312-641-3200
pes@sperling-law.com

Sperling & Slater
55 West Monroe Street
Suite 3200
Chicago, Illinois 60603
312-641-3200
fax: 312-641-6492
info@sperling-law.com