Uber, well-known as a disruptive force in the vehicle-for-hire industry, has decided to cause some disruption in the world of antitrust. In September, Uber filed an antitrust lawsuit against the St. Louis Metropolitan Taxicab Commission (MTC), the organization’s commissioners and a number of St. Louis taxi companies. The suit, Wallen v. St. Louis Metropolitan Taxicab Commission, alleges those groups’ regulatory conduct constitutes an illegal combination in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.1 Central to Uber’s claim is the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission.2 Uber, relying on N.C. Dental, alleges the MTC’s conduct is not immune from antitrust scrutiny because active market participants control the MTC and no government agency or official actively supervises its conduct.
The MTC recently moved to dismiss the lawsuit claiming that active market participants do not control the commission, and therefore state-action immunity applies to the antitrust claims even without active supervision from a government body.3
