Antitrust and Trade Regulation

Appellate Advocacy

Claims/Ethics Committee, Member

• Illinois, 1995
• Ohio, 2000

• Harvard Law School, J.D., 1995, cum laude
• Northwestern University, B.A., 1992, with highest distinction

Matt helps clients solve their challenges in two principal areas: (1) antitrust litigation and counseling, and (2) appellate litigation.  Matt is a member in the litigation department and is the chair of the firm's competition law group.

Experience

Antitrust Litigation and Counseling

Matt has handled a wide variety of antitrust litigation, including cases alleging price-fixing and other conspiracies, monopolization, tying, and exclusive dealing. He frequently consults with clients outside the litigation context on all aspects of state and federal antitrust law including price discrimination. His antitrust work spans many industries, including sports, manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, automobile-related businesses, and payment services.

He frequently advises clients on their relationships with competitors, their relationships with suppliers and customers, and pricing issues.

Highlights of Matt's recent antitrust work include these matters:

• Hyland v. Homeservices of America, et al. (E.D. Ky.) - Matt currently represents a real estate brokerage firm accused of conspiring with other real estate brokers to fix the commissions on residential real estate in the Commonwealth of Kentucky.  This class action case is scheduled to go to trial in July of 2012.
• Standard Iron Works v. AcelorMittal, et al. (N.D. Ill.) - Matt currently represents an integrated steel manufacturer accused of conspiring with other major steel manufacturers to restrict the output of steel as a means of propping up steel prices.  This case is currently in discovery.

• Midwest Agency Services et al. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al. (E.D. Ky.) – Matt most recently represented the defendants in the successful defense of tying and state law claims.  The plaintiffs alleged that Chase Bank refused to purchase automobile loans made by dealers unless the loans included a gap product issued by a Chase affiliate, and that this amounted to illegal tying under the federal antitrust laws and violations of Kentucky insurance statutes.  The district court dismissed all claims, accepting all of the arguments advanced on behalf of the defendants: (1) the plaintiffs failed to plead injury to overall competition and thus had not established antitrust injury, (2) the conduct alleged was not a tying arrangement at all, but rather the defendants’ legitimate choice as to what risks to accept, and (3) the conduct alleged did not violate the Kentucky insurance statutes. 
• Kentucky Speedway LLC v. NASCAR (E.D. Ky.) - Matt represented NASCAR in the successful defense of a conspiracy and monopolization case brought by Kentucky Speedway in federal district court. The lawsuit alleged that NASCAR and various racetrack operators, including NASCAR’s sister company, had conspired to exclude Kentucky Speedway and that NASCAR had illegally monopolized stock car racing.  The district judge granted summary judgment for the defense.  The Sixth Circuit affirmed.

Appellate Litigation

Matt also represents clients in federal and state appellate courts. He served as a law clerk to the Honorable David A. Nelson, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. He is the editor-in-chief of the Sixth Circuit Practice Manual (LexisNexis 3d ed. 2006) and the author of its chapters on appellate jurisdiction, stays pending appeal, and briefing requirements. He is also a co-author of Kentucky Appellate Practice (Thompson/West 2006) with his colleagues Sheryl Snyder and Griffin Terry Sumner.

Matt's appellate work includes these successes:

• Welsh Development Company v. Warren County Regional Planning Commission, 128 Ohio St.3d 471, 2011-Ohio-1604, 946 N.E.2d 215 (Ohio 2011) – The court of appeals had held that Welsh Development failed to perfect its administrative appeal based on its interpretation of the statutes governing appeals in Ohio state courts.  Matt convinced the Ohio Supreme Court to accept the appeal to establish clear standards for Ohio administrative appeals, and then convinced the Supreme Court to reverse.  In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that Welsh Development’s appeal had been properly filed, and it articulated clear standards for filing such appeals.
• Alliance Health Group LLC v. Bridging Health Options, LLC, 553 F.3d 397 (5th Cir. 2008) - This case of first impression in the Fifth Circuit involved an issue of interpretation of forum selection clauses on which three other circuits had split. Matt successfully argued that a clause requiring litigation "in" a particular county permitted litigation in federal court, and not just the state court for that county, so long as the federal courthouse was physically located in the county in question.
• Ignazio v. Clear Channel Communications, 113 Ohio St.3d 276, 865 N.E.2d 18 (Ohio 2007) – The court of appeals had held that Clear Channel’s employment arbitration agreement was unenforceable because of an objectionable provision. Matt successfully convinced the Ohio Supreme Court to accept this appeal in order to set standards for severability of contract provisions, and then convinced the Supreme Court to reverse the court of appeals. The Supreme Court held that the unlawful provision of the arbitration agreement was severable and the remainder of the agreement enforceable.
• Scovill v. WSYX/ABC, 425 F.3d 1012 (6^th Cir. 2005) – In this employment discrimination lawsuit, Matt successfully urged the Sixth Circuit to reverse the district court’s severance of certain aspects of an arbitration agreement while affirming the district court’s findings that the dispute was arbitrable and the arbitration clause lawful.

• "Cincinnati Leading Lawyer" in antitrust practice by Cincy Magazine, 2006-Present
• AV® Pre-Eminent Rated, Martindale-Hubbell®

Upcoming

Past

Editor-in-chief and contributing author: "Sixth Circuit Practice Manual" (LexisNexis 3d ed. 2006)

"Kentucky Appellate Practice" (Thompson/West 2006)
Snyder, Sumner and Blickensderfer

"The Federal Trade Commission Rediscovers the Robinson-Patman Act"
Corporate Counsel, May 2000

"Unleashing RICO"
17 Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 867, 1994