David C. Eddy

David Eddy has been handling complex commercial litigation for clients for  thirty years. 

Mr. Eddy has extensive experience in litigation and counseling in matters of significant import to clients in courts throughout the United States, including nationwide and regional antitrust class actions (including price-fixing, tie-in, and exclusive dealing claims), governmental review of mergers and acquisitions (in diverse industries ranging from commercial aviation to petroleum refining and marketing), Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice investigations, nationwide product liability class actions, and large commercial litigation (including trademark, tort, and contract claims). 

Mr. Eddy has represented clients in antitrust matters in a diverse array of businesses, including, textiles, herbicides, chemicals, commercial airline manufacture, boats, timber, petroleum, fire arms, food products, trucking, and electronic products.

Mr. Eddy routinely provides antitrust transaction advice to clients on a range of issues, including pricing policies, distribution policies, licensing agreements, competitor collaboration, and joint ventures.  Mr. Eddy has prepared antitrust compliance guidelines and provided antitrust compliance training seminars for clients.

Born in Wisconsin, Mr. Eddy was graduated from Wesleyan University, cum laude, and the George Washington University National Law Center, with honors.  Mr. Eddy moved to South Carolina in 2000.

• Prior to joining Nexsen Pruet, Mr. Eddy was a partner in the law firm of Howrey & Simon in Washington, D.C.
• American Bar Association - Antitrust Section, Litigation Section, Product Liability Section

• Successful prosecution and settlement of claims for more than $80 million in multi-district litigation on behalf of more than twenty textile, non-woven and carpet companies located in Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina for price-fixing and customer allocation of a key input—polyester staple fiber.
• Successful defense of two lawsuits filed by a major multi-national chemical company against our client, a major producer of herbicides and herbicide-resistant seeds, seeking in excess of a billion dollars in damages for alleged anticompetitive practices. 
• Successful prosecution of a class action against the world’s largest paper and wood products company for price-fixing of pulpwood timber sold by timber owners in four states in the Southeast U.S.  After class certification, the case was settled and a substantial monetary recovery was obtained by the class. 

• Antitrust Enforcement: How Will the 2008 Election Impact You and Your Business?
  Each presidential election provides the potential for changes in federal antitrust policy. The Obama administration will influence antitrust enforcement in a number of ways, primarily through staffing and enforcement decisions at the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice ("DOJ") and appointments to the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC").
• Nexsen Pruet Secures $107 Million Settlement
  Charlotte, N.C. - Nexsen Pruet’s Antitrust Practice Group recently settled federal claims against Hoechst Celanese Corporation and its affiliated entities for $107 million.

• Mount Vernon Mills et al. v. Hoechst Celanese, et al.
  Nexsen Pruet defeats motion to dismiss filed by German companies alleging lack of jurisdiction in polyester staple fiber antitrust case.
• Mount Vernon Mills et al. v. Hoechst Celanese, et al.
  Nexsen Pruet wins huge settlement for its textile company clients in polyester staple fiber antitrust litigation against Hoechst Celanese and related companies.
• Mount Vernon Mills et al. v. Hoechst Celanese, et al.
  Nexsen Pruet obtains significant discovery sanctions against defendants in polyester staple fiber antitrust litigation.
• Marion Crane, Benjamin Porter, and Robert Taylor, Plaintiffs, v. International Paper Company and CWC of North Carolina, Inc., Defendants
  Timber landowners from North and South Carolina obtained certification of a class action lawsuit against International Paper (IP) and one of its suppliers, charging widespread price fixing of pulpwood timber in violation of the federal antitrust laws. The action was settled with significant recoveries for class members.