On Monday, August 5, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit delivered a significant victory for Kellogg Hansen client NTE in its antitrust monopolization case against Duke Energy.  The Fourth Circuit’s ruling creates an important precedent on multiple important principles of U.S. antitrust law.

NTE’s mission has been to provide cleaner, lower-cost electricity to wholesale customers in the Carolinas, where Duke Energy has been the incumbent monopolist for years. Duke Energy admittedly could not compete with NTE on price or efficiency, so, as NTE’s lawsuit highlighted, Duke undertook multiple strategies to stifle competition from NTE.  Among other things, Duke Energy terminated NTE’s interconnection agreement under false pretenses and in violation of FERC regulations; and it offered a renewal contract to an existing customer, Fayetteville, with a complex discounted pricing structure that was designed to prevent NTE from competing.

The District Court had initially granted summary judgment to Duke Energy.  It analyzed each aspect of Duke’s multi-pronged strategy separately, and asserting that each separate component did not independently constitute an antitrust violation. The Court of Appeals also reaffirmed an important principle of judicial recusal:  once a judge is recused, that judge is recused from the case permanently. 

The Fourth Circuit rejected this reasoning and sided with NTE Energy.

NTE Energy is represented by Derek Ho, Caroline Schechinger, Matthew Wilkins, and Jonathan Liebman of Kellogg Hansen.

Read the full article here: Law360’s Legal Lions Of The Week – Law360