Swisher has asked a federal judge in California to force a rival company to pay nearly $20 million in legal fees as a sanction for pursuing what it called a “bad faith” antitrust lawsuit for nearly a decade.
Swisher’s legal team at law firms Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and Akerman argued in a filing on Tuesday in Santa Ana federal court that Trendsettah’s case “was built on a foundation of criminal misconduct, fraud, and misrepresentation.”
The claim marked the latest flashpoint in a nearly decade-long antitrust and contract claims fight between the two companies, with both leveling allegations against each other about deception and distrust.
Related: Swisher Beats $44M Antitrust Verdict
Swisher’s lawyers, including Gibson Dunn partner Theodore Boutrous, contend that Trendsettah long concealed a “tax-evasion conspiracy — while simultaneously attempting to recover millions of dollars of purported lost profits.”
“Because [Trendsettah] never should have filed this sham lawsuit, [it] should be required to pay Swisher’s fees and costs as a sanction for its bad-faith abuse of the judicial process,” Boutrous said in a statement on Wednesday.
At the center of the feud, Swisher had entered a deal with Trendsettah to produce a short and narrow product called a cigarillo, but the business relationship soured.
Trendsettah in 2014 sued Swisher in Los Angeles, claiming breach of contract and antitrust violations and demanding damages for alleged loss of profits.
Featured News
Rio Tinto to Acquire U.S.-Based Arcadium Lithium in $6.7 Billion Deal
Oct 9, 2024 by
CPI
Biden Administration Warns of Price Gouging Risks Ahead of Hurricane Milton’s Landfall
Oct 9, 2024 by
CPI
Cleveland-Cliffs Clears Regulatory Hurdle in Stelco Acquisition
Oct 9, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Showdown: Google Confronts Threats to Its Business in App Distribution, Search, and Advertising
Oct 9, 2024 by
CPI
X Returns to Brazil After Supreme Court Ruling Clears Path
Oct 9, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh