Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ANTITRUST—E.D. La.: Settlement of indirect purchasers’ claims against pool product makers gets preliminary approval, (Dec 31, 2014)

By Linda O’Brien, J.D., LL.M.

The federal district court in New Orleans has given preliminary approval to a $2 million settlement between pool product makers Hayward Industries and Zodiac Pool Systems, Inc. and indirect pool product purchasers. The settlement would resolve claims against Hayward and Zodiac over their alleged roles in a conspiracy involving Pool Corporation—the country’s largest distributor of pool products—and other pool products manufacturers (In re Pool Products Distribution Market Antitrust Litigation, December 31, 2014, Vance, S.).

Background. After an investigation by the FTC into Pool Corporation’s alleged unfair methods of competition resulted in a consent decree, direct and indirect purchaser plaintiffs filed suit against Pool and the three largest manufacturers of pool products in the United States. In May 2013, the court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss and allowed the indirect purchaser plaintiffs’ Arizona, California, Florida, and Missouri antitrust claims to proceed.

Settlement class. For purposes of the settlement, the court preliminarily certified a class of individuals and entities indirectly purchasing from the defendants between January 1, 2008 and July 16, 2013. The plaintiffs satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b). The court preliminarily determined that the members of the settlement class were so numerous that joinder would be impracticable; there were questions of law and fact common to each member of the class; the claims of the class representatives were typical of the class; class representatives would fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class; and the class action was superior to other methods of adjudication of the controversy.

Under the terms of the settlement, Hayward would pay $1.5 million and Zodiac would pay $500,000. The amounts will be used to pay the notice and administration expenses, incentive awards, attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses, and class member benefits.

Final approval of the settlement was set for May 14, 2015, at which time the court will consider the fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy of the settlement; the fairness and reasonableness of the allocation plan for the settlement fund; and the application of class counsel for an award of attorneys’ fees.

The case is No. 2:12-cv-02328-SSV-JCW (MDL No. 2328).

Attorneys: Thomas J.H. Brill (Law Office of Thomas H. Brill) for Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs' Liaison Counsel. Arnold Levin (Levin, Fishbein, Sedran & Berman), Daniel W. Krasner (Wolf, Haldenstein, Adler, Freeman & Herz, LLP), Douglas G. Thompson (Finkelstein Thompson LLP), and Jay L. Himes (Labaton Sucharow, LLP) for Plaintiffs' Steering Committee. William Bernard Gaudet (Adams & Reese, LLP) for Defendants' Liaison Counsel. David H. Bamberger (DLA Piper, LLP) for Defendants' Lead Counsel. Wayne J. Lee (Stone, Pigman, Walther, Wittmann, LLC) for Manufacturer Defendants' Liaison Counsel.

Companies: Pool Corporation; Hayward Industries, Inc.; Pentair Water Pool and Spa, Inc.; Zodiac Pool Systems, Inc.

Cases: Antitrust LouisianaNews