PRIA, Government Policy, Made Personal

Summary

The United States can sue in federal court when its business or property is harmed by antitrust violations. It may sue where the defendant lives, is found, or has an agent, no matter how much money is at stake. If the United States wins, it gets three times the actual damages plus the cost of the lawsuit. If the United States asks quickly, the court may also award simple interest on the actual damages from the date the U.S.’s lawsuit papers are served until the judgment (or for a shorter time) if the court thinks that is fair. To decide, the court will look only at four things: whether either side or their lawyer made meritless motions or acted in bad faith to delay; whether rules or orders meant to speed the case were broken; whether conduct was mainly to delay or increase costs; and whether the interest is needed to compensate the United States properly.

Title 15, §15a

Commerce and Trade, Source: USLM XML via OLRC

Whenever the United States is hereafter injured in its business or property by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws it may sue therefor in the United States district court for the district in which the defendant resides or is found or has an agent, without respect to the amount in controversy, and shall recover threefold the damages by it sustained and the cost of suit. The court may award under this section, pursuant to a motion by the United States promptly made, simple interest on actual damages for the period beginning on the date of service of the pleading of the United States setting forth a claim under the antitrust laws and ending on the date of judgment, or for any shorter period therein, if the court finds that the award of such interest for such period is just in the circumstances. In determining whether an award of interest under this section for any period is just in the circumstances, the court shall consider only—

(1)whether the United States or the opposing party, or either party’s representative, made motions or asserted claims or defenses so lacking in merit as to show that such party or representative acted intentionally for delay or otherwise acted in bad faith;

(2)whether, in the course of the action involved, the United States or the opposing party, or either party’s representative, violated any applicable rule, statute, or court order providing for sanctions for dilatory behavior or otherwise providing for expeditious proceedings;

(3)whether the United States or the opposing party, or either party’s representative, engaged in conduct primarily for the purpose of delaying the litigation or increasing the cost thereof; and

(4)whether the award of such interest is necessary to compensate the United States adequately for the injury sustained by the United States.

Notes & Related Subsidiaries

Editorial Notes

References in Text

The antitrust laws, referred to in text, are defined in section 12 of this title.

Amendments

1990—Pub. L. 101–588 substituted “threefold the” for “actual”. 1980—Pub. L. 96–349 inserted provisions respecting award of prejudgment interest including considerations for the court in determining whether an award is just under the circumstances.

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Effective Date

of 1980 AmendmentAmendment by Pub. L. 96–349 applicable only with respect to actions commenced after Sept. 12, 1980, see section 4(b) of Pub. L. 96–349, set out as a note under section 15 of this title.

Effective Date

Section effective six months after July 7, 1955, see note set out under section 15b of this title.

§15a Suits by United States; Amount of Recovery; Prejudgment Interest

Summary

Title 15, §15a

Notes & Related Subsidiaries

Editorial Notes

References in Text

Amendments

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Effective Date

Effective Date

Citations & Metadata