Close X
Attorney Spotlight

Find out which two countries Cheryl Palmeri gets the most questions about related to International Trade in today's market? Find out more>


Close X


Search our Experience

Experience Spotlight

In June 2016, AmSurg Corp. and Envision Healthcare Holdings, Inc. (Envision) announced they have signed a definitive merger agreement pursuant to which the companies will combine in an all-stock transaction. Upon completion of the merger, which is expected to be tax-free to the shareholders of both organizations, the combined company will be named Envision Healthcare Corporation and co-headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee and Greenwood Village, Colorado. The company's common stock is expected to trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol: EVHC. Bass, Berry & Sims served as lead counsel on the transaction, led by Jim Jenkins. Read more.

AmSurg logo

Close X

Thought Leadership

Enter your search terms in the relevant box(es) below to search for specific Thought Leadership.
To see a recent listing of Thought Leadership, click the blue Search button below.

Thought Leadership Spotlight

Inside the FCA blogInside the FCA blog features ongoing updates related to the False Claims Act (FCA), including insight on the latest legal decisions, regulatory developments and FCA settlements. The blog provides timely updates for corporate boards, directors, compliance managers, general counsel and other parties interested in the organizational impact and legal developments stemming from issues potentially giving rise to FCA liability.

Read More >

2013 Criminal Antitrust Fines Top $1 Billion for Second Straight Year


October 3, 2013

For the second straight year, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) collected more than $1 billion in antitrust fines. This year’s $1.02 billion in fines for fiscal year 2013 confirms the DOJ’s resolve to attack price fixing violations as highlighted by massive price-fixing fines against auto parts manufacturers. This year’s hefty total is only slightly below the 2012 record of $1.14 billion, which included a price fixing fine leveled against an LCD display manufacturer that tied the highest price fixing fine ever imposed on a single company.

Last month, the DOJ announced an agreement with nine Japan-based auto parts manufacturers to pay $740 million in criminal fines for their roles in fixing the prices of more than 30 different auto products. Combined with penalties previously obtained against 11 other auto parts manufacturers, the DOJ now has obtained more than $1.6 billion in total criminal antitrust fines related to auto parts price fixing. In conjunction with the fines, the DOJ charged 21 auto parts company executives individually with criminal antitrust violations. Seventeen of the executives already have been sentenced to serve time in U.S. prisons or have entered into plea agreements calling for significant prison sentences.

In addition to the criminal fines for automotive parts price fixing, in 2013 the DOJ obtained significant criminal fines against numerous banks for their alleged manipulation of LIBOR benchmark interest rates.

The Bottom Line

In the last five years, criminal fines for antitrust violations in the U.S. are more than $4 billion which exceeds total criminal fines levied in the eight years of the Bush administration by more than $1 billion. This is further evidence that the promise of heightened enforcement of the antitrust laws by the Obama administration has become a reality and there is every reason to expect that 2014 likely will bring additional major antitrust investigations and penalties to companies in industries that may not yet expect them.

If you have questions about the content of this alert, please contact one of the authors listed above.

Related Professionals

Related Services


Visiting, or interacting with, this website does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Although we are always interested in hearing from visitors to our website, we cannot accept representation on a new matter from either existing clients or new clients until we know that we do not have a conflict of interest that would prevent us from doing so. Therefore, please do not send us any information about any new matter that may involve a potential legal representation until we have confirmed that a conflict of interest does not exist and we have expressly agreed in writing to the representation. Until there is such an agreement, we will not be deemed to have given you any advice, any information you send may not be deemed privileged and confidential, and we may be able to represent adverse parties.