Stuart N. Senator

Profile

Stuart N. Senator is a litigation partner in the Los Angeles office of Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP. His practice focuses primarily on complex business litigation in trial and appellate courts. Mr. Senator’s clients include a diverse group of national and international companies, and his major areas of practice include antitrust, unfair competition, legal malpractice/malicious prosecution and law firm ethics and conflicts of interest.

Mr. Senator provides antitrust counseling and compliance advice on numerous subjects, including distribution practices, pricing, trade association activity and mergers. Mr. Senator has also been an invited presenter at various professional conferences regarding antitrust issues. In addition to his work for clients, Mr. Senator is General Counsel to the firm, advising on issues relating to legal ethics and law firm management. 

Community Service/Pro Bono

Mr. Senator is active in community affairs and pro bono matters. He has been a trustee of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy Foundation, a director of Menorah Housing Foundation and a trustee of the California State Parks Foundation.

In 2010, Mr. Senator received the Social Justice Award from the American Civil Liberties Union for his work in leading litigation to protect farm workers from unsafe work conditions. In 2013, Mr. Senator received Public Counsel’s Pro Bono Award for Impact Litigation for his continued work on this issue. Mr. Senator has also received the Western Law Center For Disability Rights' Pro Bono Award for leading litigation to further the rights of individuals with disabilities.

Key Representations

  • Solvay Pharmaceuticals in the United States Supreme Court in the recent FTC v. Actavis case, in which the Court determined the appropriate level of antitrust scrutiny for so-called “reverse payment” settlements of pharmaceutical patent litigation and rejected the FTC’s proposed presumption of illegality for those settlements.
  • Shell Oil Company in defense of antitrust challenges to gasoline pricing and joint ventures, including obtaining a unanimous decision of the United States Supreme Court in Shell's favor.
  • AbbVie Inc., formerly Abbott Laboratories, in:
    • multiple class actions and litigation by a competitor, alleging predatory pricing of HIV drugs.
      • Obtained a defense verdict at a jury trial on the competitor’s antitrust claims for $1.7 billion in damages, which was recognized by the Daily Journal as one of the top verdicts of 2011.
      • Obtained ruling from U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in the indirect purchaser class action that Abbott pricing was not actionable under the antitrust laws.
    • government investigations and multi-district civil class action litigations alleging that settlements of patent litigation violated federal and state antitrust laws.
      • Obtained precedential decision from 11th Circuit rejecting per se rule and articulating standard for analysis of patent settlements under antitrust laws.
      • Obtained appellate decision vacating district court’s certification of class of direct purchasers.
      • Obtained defense verdict in a jury trial on all claims of a non-settling defendant, affirmed by 9th Circuit in a decision cited by Law360 as one of 2009’s major decisions in antitrust law.
  • Takeda Pharmaceuticals in defense of class action and private litigation alleging violation of the antitrust laws from a pharmaceutical intellectual property settlement agreement.
  • LG Display in defense of class action and individual antitrust cases stemming from allegations of price-fixing among manufacturers of LCD panels. Certain of the cases have now been successfully resolved on behalf of LG Display and others remain pending.
  • United Farm Workers and individual farm workers in seeking to compel Cal/OSHA to enforce heat illness laws requiring agriculture employers to provide shade, water and rest breaks for farm workers who pick crops in sweltering heat. 
  • International, national and local law firms in defending legal malpractice claims.
  • International, national and local law firms in defending against motions to disqualify the firms from legal representations.

Stuart N. Senator is a litigation partner in the Los Angeles office of Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP. His practice focuses primarily on complex business litigation in trial and appellate courts. Mr. Senator’s clients include a diverse group of national and international companies, and his major areas of practice include antitrust, unfair competition, legal malpractice/malicious prosecution and law firm ethics and conflicts of interest.

Mr. Senator provides antitrust counseling and compliance advice on numerous subjects, including distribution practices, pricing, trade association activity and mergers. Mr. Senator has also been an invited presenter at various professional conferences regarding antitrust issues. In addition to his work for clients, Mr. Senator is General Counsel to the firm, advising on issues relating to legal ethics and law firm management. 

Community Service/Pro Bono

Mr. Senator is active in community affairs and pro bono matters. He has been a trustee of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy Foundation, a director of Menorah Housing Foundation and a trustee of the California State Parks Foundation.

In 2010, Mr. Senator received the Social Justice Award from the American Civil Liberties Union for his work in leading litigation to protect farm workers from unsafe work conditions. In 2013, Mr. Senator received Public Counsel’s Pro Bono Award for Impact Litigation for his continued work on this issue. Mr. Senator has also received the Western Law Center For Disability Rights' Pro Bono Award for leading litigation to further the rights of individuals with disabilities.

Key Representations

  • Solvay Pharmaceuticals in the United States Supreme Court in the recent FTC v. Actavis case, in which the Court determined the appropriate level of antitrust scrutiny for so-called “reverse payment” settlements of pharmaceutical patent litigation and rejected the FTC’s proposed presumption of illegality for those settlements.
  • Shell Oil Company in defense of antitrust challenges to gasoline pricing and joint ventures, including obtaining a unanimous decision of the United States Supreme Court in Shell's favor.
  • AbbVie Inc., formerly Abbott Laboratories, in:
    • multiple class actions and litigation by a competitor, alleging predatory pricing of HIV drugs.
      • Obtained a defense verdict at a jury trial on the competitor’s antitrust claims for $1.7 billion in damages, which was recognized by the Daily Journal as one of the top verdicts of 2011.
      • Obtained ruling from U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in the indirect purchaser class action that Abbott pricing was not actionable under the antitrust laws.
    • government investigations and multi-district civil class action litigations alleging that settlements of patent litigation violated federal and state antitrust laws.
      • Obtained precedential decision from 11th Circuit rejecting per se rule and articulating standard for analysis of patent settlements under antitrust laws.
      • Obtained appellate decision vacating district court’s certification of class of direct purchasers.
      • Obtained defense verdict in a jury trial on all claims of a non-settling defendant, affirmed by 9th Circuit in a decision cited by Law360 as one of 2009’s major decisions in antitrust law.
  • Takeda Pharmaceuticals in defense of class action and private litigation alleging violation of the antitrust laws from a pharmaceutical intellectual property settlement agreement.
  • LG Display in defense of class action and individual antitrust cases stemming from allegations of price-fixing among manufacturers of LCD panels. Certain of the cases have now been successfully resolved on behalf of LG Display and others remain pending.
  • United Farm Workers and individual farm workers in seeking to compel Cal/OSHA to enforce heat illness laws requiring agriculture employers to provide shade, water and rest breaks for farm workers who pick crops in sweltering heat. 
  • International, national and local law firms in defending legal malpractice claims.
  • International, national and local law firms in defending against motions to disqualify the firms from legal representations.