David L. Hanselman, Jr. represents clients in a broad range of antitrust and class action lawsuits. He heads the Chicago office’s antitrust and competition practice group, which has earned Global Competition Review’s “Elite” ranking eight years running.
David defends businesses in large, complex antitrust litigations and specializes in antitrust class actions. Since 2010, David has defended clients accused of price fixing in five multidistrict antitrust litigations: In re Generic Pharmaceuticals Pricing Antitrust Litigation, In re Domestic Drywall Antitrust Litigation, In re Dairy Farmers of America, Inc. Cheese Antitrust Litigation, In re Steel Antitrust Litigation, and In re Sulfuric Acid Antitrust Litigation.
In other significant antitrust matters, David helped Amgen Inc. defeat a motion filed by a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson to enjoin its bundled contract for oncology drugs following a week-long bench trial. He then led a team of lawyers from several McDermott offices in four antitrust class actions pending in federal courts across the United States alleging that hospitals engaged in wage-fixing conspiracies. In one of these cases, David devised and implemented a strategy to exclude the testimony of the plaintiffs’ expert witness at the class certification stage. The resulting decision, first in the Seventh Circuit to apply the principles of the landmark In re Hydrogen Peroxide Antitrust Litigation decision, denied class certification outright on the ground that the expert’s opinions were so unreliable that they were “essentially inadmissible.” In the second, David twice defeated class certification on the issues of antitrust injury-in-fact and damages. In the third, the district court excluded the testimony of the plaintiff’s economist, whom David deposed, and denied class certification. And in a fourth, David argued and won summary judgment on the plaintiffs’ per se antitrust claim.
Helping clients avoid charges in government antitrust investigations has yielded some of David’s biggest victories. David has successfully closed five investigations by the Antitrust Division of the US Department of Justice.
David is also a frequent writer and speaker in the areas of antitrust law and class action procedure.
Beyond his antitrust work, David has defended clients in class actions and multidistrict proceedings involving industries including pharmaceuticals, consumer products, insurance, managed care and telecommunications. He has obtained dismissals of class actions and defeated motions for class certification. David helped defeat certification of a putative class of insureds in a federal multidistrict class action in Miami that asserted RICO, ERISA, and state law claims against six of the nation’s largest managed-care organizations. David also represented a leading cellular telephone service provider in a series of class actions consolidated in federal court in Baltimore alleging that cellular telephones emit unsafe levels of radio frequency radiation. He also achieved the outright dismissal of two automobile insurance class action lawsuits, which the South Carolina Supreme Court affirmed.
David has tried cases in both Illinois and Indiana courts. Also experienced in alternative dispute resolution, he has tried two commercial contract disputes before panels of the American Arbitration Association.
Education
University of Chicago Law School, JD, cum laude, 1998
Harvard College, AB, cum laude, 1995
Admissions
Illinois
Indiana
Courts/Agencies
US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana
US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Partner | Chicago
Chicago: +1 312 984 3610
Chicago: +1 312 984 7700
GCR Insight / October 2019
Law360 / March 28, 2019
Webinar / McDermott Event / June 12, 2018
1
Chicago / Law360 / August 24, 2017
Chicago / Law360 / August 23, 2017
Global Competition Review / August 22, 2017
Chicago / Global Competition Review / March 7, 2017
Law360 / September 26, 2016
Law360 / August 19, 2016
Law360 / July 6, 2016
Drywall Makers Fight Bid for New Price-Fixing MDL Plaintiffs
Global Competition Review / April 27, 2016
Drywall Defendants Seek Dismissal of Some Claims Against Them
Law360 / April 25, 2016
Chicago / Law360 / February 29, 2016
Law360 / February 5, 2016
Law360 / January 27, 2016
Hospitals Can Seek Limits on Private Docs in FTC Merger Suit
Law360 / January 25, 2016
Law360 / July 31, 2015
Global Competition Review / July 1, 2015
Press Releases / June 30, 2015
Law360 / October 14, 2014
Law360 / August 19, 2014
Crain's Detroit Business / February 24, 2014
1
2
3
4
Do not send any information or documents that you want to have treated as secret or confidential. Providing information to McDermott via email links on this website or other introductory email communications will not create an attorney-client relationship; will not preclude McDermott from representing any other person or firm in any matter; and will not obligate McDermott to keep confidential the information you provide. McDermott cannot enter into an attorney-client relationship with you until McDermott has determined that doing so will not create a conflict of interest and until you and McDermott have entered into a written agreement or engagement letter that sets forth the terms of our relationship.
We use cookies to improve the functionality and performance of this site. By continuing to use this site, you are providing us with your consent to our use of cookies. Please see our Privacy Policy for details.