Romero, et al. v. Philip Morris Inc., et al.

NCLC urged the New Mexico Supreme Court to interpret New Mexico antitrust law consistently with federal antitrust law. In its amicus brief, NCLC argued that the New Mexico appeals court explicitly refused to follow federal antitrust precedent requiring plaintiffs to prove parallel conduct plus additional factors that indicate the actors did not act independently. By interpreting New Mexico antitrust law inconsistently with federal law, the appeals court expanded the scope of liability in New Mexico and made it more difficult for businesses to predict what behavior is lawful.

The New Mexico Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether New Mexico antitrust law should be interpreted consistently with federal antitrust law.

Amicus brief filed 1/7/09. Cert. granted 2/27/09.