Public statements by corporate executives may help plaintiffs plead antitrust conspiracy claims. In In re Delta/AirTran Baggage Fee Antitrust Litigation, 1 the Court held that a price-fixing complaint stated sufficient facts to survive dismissal because in addition to claims of parallel conduct, the complaint also detailed public statements by corporate executives that allegedly facilitated the illegal conspiracy.

In Twombly, the Supreme Court made clear that parallel conduct without more does not run afoul of the antitrust laws. Since parallel conduct is as consistent with unilateral self-interest as it is with conspiracy, a plaintiff must allege additional facts to render an allegation of conspiracy plausible. As the Delta/AirTran decision demonstrates, these additional facts may be public statements.  Read more…