June 04, 2019 | New York Law Journal
What Happens to Whistleblowers When the Government Doesn't Intervene?As the court stressed, "[i]f the government intervenes, the civil action remains the same--it simply has one additional party."
By Gordon Schnell
4 minute read
December 22, 2003 | New Jersey Law Journal
No Free Speech Problem In Muzzling TelemarketersThe Do-Not-Call registry's restriction on commercial, but not charitable, speech is properly grounded in a lower degree of constitutional protection.
By Gordon Schnell
4 minute read
April 18, 2002 | Law.com
Cooperation AgreementsA former employee may engage in a variety of conduct that can wreak havoc on a company. This potentially damaging conduct can easily be avoided (or at least significantly discouraged) through the simple use of contractual tools such as confidentiality, nondisclosure, nonsolicitation, and noncompete agreements.
By Gordon Schnell
8 minute read
July 03, 2002 | Law.com
Iffy Prognosis for Intern SuitIn a lawsuit filed in federal district court in Washington, D.C., a group of medical residents has challenged on antitrust grounds the National Resident Matching Program. The case, which could ultimately drag into court up to 1,000 of the country's top hospitals, has sent a shiver through the health care industry. A win for the residents could place the entire industry in financial turmoil. But that win is far from certain.
By Gordon Schnell
5 minute read
December 08, 2003 | National Law Journal
Muzzling telemarketersWill telemarketers ever be forced to cease and desist from annoying us? That answer may be forthcoming soon from the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which is hearing a challenge to the constitutionality of the Do-Not-Call Registry.
By Gordon SchnellSpecial to The National Law Journal
5 minute read
December 11, 2001 | Law.com
Walk-Away ProvisionsThe failed merger between United Airlines and US Air, which fell apart because of a threatened regulatory challenge, demonstrated the importance -- for some parties -- of having antitrust "walk-away" provisions in their merger agreements. These provisions can protect parties from the inordinate delay, disruption, expense and ultimate uncertainty that result from an extended merger review or challenge by government antitrust authorities.
By Gordon Schnell
9 minute read
September 05, 2005 | National Law Journal
Exclusive DealingWith the Jan. 4 indictment by New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer of James Zimmerman, former head of Federated Department Stores, the retail industry has received a stark wake-up call on the risks associated with exclusive dealing. Could Spitzer's challenge to the Lenox/Waterford deal, and the spotlight he has placed on Zimmerman, be the opening salvo of Spitzer's next great thing? Probably not. But it should put retailers and their suppliers on notice.
By Gordon Schnell
9 minute read
October 13, 2005 | Law.com
Pfizer's Cholesterol Drug Gambit: Dodging the Antitrust Laws?By selling Lipitor and Torcetrapib in tandem, Pfizer hopes to provide a one-two knockout punch to heart disease. Critics of the plan suggest the unusual bundling is merely about protecting Lipitor from competition. If given the FDA nod, Pfizer would likely be immunized from the liability it might otherwise be exposed to from tying the two drugs together. The prospect of such an antitrust trump card presents a regulatory loophole in the pharmaceutical industry that may be too big to ignore.
By Gordon Schnell
11 minute read
July 31, 2002 | New York Law Journal
Outside CounselA group of current and former medical residents has challenged on antitrust grounds the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP), the 50-year-old system that "matches" medical students with residency programs. 1 The lawsuit was filed in May in federal district court in Washington, D.C.
By Gordon Schnell
10 minute read
November 12, 2008 | New York Law Journal
A Call to Albany: It's Time to Amend the Donnelly ActGordon Schnell, a partner at Constantine Cannon, and Sam Rikkers, an associate at the firm, write: Let's face it. The Donnelly Act - New York's antitrust statute; the state's "little Sherman Act" - is not worth very much these days. For all practical purposes, it can only be used by the attorney general or by a business that has been harmed by the challenged anticompetitive conduct. For everyone else, namely individual consumers - the very constituency the antitrust laws were designed to protect - the statute is pretty much off-limits.
By Gordon Schnell and Sam Rikkers
11 minute read