Fourth Circuit Affirms Divestiture Order in Antitrust Challenge Brought by Private Party Against Acquisition

Snell & Wilmer

Snell & WilmerIn an unprecedented move, the Fourth Circuit in Steves and Sons Inc. v. JELD-WEN Inc. recently affirmed an order requiring a company to unwind the acquisition of competitor business in connection with an antitrust action brought by a private-party plaintiff. The U.S. Supreme Court previously held that private-party plaintiffs could obtain such divestiture orders, but until now, successful efforts to obtain this sort of relief had been limited to antitrust challenges brought by government antitrust regulators, such as the Federal Trade Commission, the Justice Department, or a state attorney general.

Divestiture in antitrust cases with private plaintiffs had been rare because these parties often run up against equitable defenses (such as laches or the availability of alternative damages), or because courts determine that divestiture would impose too great a burden on the defendant. The plaintiff in Steves, both a competitor and customer of the defendant JELD-WEN in the molded door business, was confronted with several of these defenses but successfully overcame them. The plaintiff first showed that the effects of the merger “may be to substantially lessen competition,” in violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Act. The plaintiff also showed that that the specific harm it had suffered “reflects the anticompetitive effect” of the merger, that monetary damages could not fully compensate for this harm, and that other equitable factors supported the equitable remedy of divestiture. In particular, the Fourth Circuit explained how the merger “resulted in a duopoly” where suppliers and manufacturers were vertically integrated and that the defendant “used their market power to threaten the. . . survival” of smaller manufacturers such as the plaintiff.

Steves highlights the risk that absent compliance with antitrust law, a company could be forced to take on the burdensome task of unwinding a merger or acquisition. This risk is not only present in antitrust actions initiated by government agencies, but also in cases brought by private parties, such as customers that may be impacted by the transaction.


  1. No. 19-1397, 2021 WL 630521 (4th Cir. Feb. 18, 2021).
  2. Id. at 296.
  3. 2020 WL 630521, at *8.
  4. Id. at *20.
  5. Id. at *24.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Snell & Wilmer | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Snell & Wilmer

Snell & Wilmer on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.