On April 6, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit declined to revive a price-fixing lawsuit brought by a proposed class of farmers against manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers of crop inputs. In re: Crop Inputs Antitrust Litigation, No. 24-3104 (8th Cir. April 6, 2026). Plaintiffs alleged defendants conspired to boycott e-commerce platforms and inflate prices through a secretive distribution process in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The appeal arose from twenty-eight similar actions consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. Judge Sarah Pitlyk concluded that plaintiffs failed to adequately allege defendants’ parallel conduct and dismissed their claims. The Eighth Circuit affirmed.

On September 17, 2025, Judge James Donato of the Northern District of California granted a motion to dismiss a putative antitrust class action, holding that plaintiffs failed to state a plausible Sherman Act claim, dismissing all federal antitrust claims with prejudice, and declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ state law claims in the absence of any remaining basis for federal jurisdiction.  Cavalleri v. Hermès International, No. 24-cv-01707-JD (N.D. Cal. Sept. 17, 2025).  

On February 26, 2025, the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Onondaga, rendered a decision involving an alleged anticompetitive acquisition under New York’s Donnelly Act.  This decision demonstrates the importance of considering whether a contemplated acquisition may be scrutinized by state antitrust enforcers.  People v. Intermountain Mgmt., Inc., Index No. 008588/2022 (Sup. Ct, Onondaga Cty. 2025).