Steven E. Bizar, Co-leader of the antitrust/competition practice, is a first chair trial lawyer well regarded for his success in the defense of antitrust class action and Section 1 Sherman act cases and his trial of complex commercial disputes in court and before arbitrators. He has three decades of experience spanning a diverse range of antitrust and trade regulation, contract and business tort, government investigation, insurance and reinsurance, securities and corporate governance matters. Mr. Bizar regularly represents multinational and domestic companies, partnerships, and individuals, including officers and directors, on issues arising across a broad spectrum of industries, including chemicals, banking and financial services, construction materials, health insurance, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, wholesale distribution, gaming, agricultural products, technology, and telecommunications.
Mr. Bizar advises clients throughout the United States and around the globe on complex business disputes and litigates high-profile trial and appellate matters in federal and state courts and before arbitral tribunals. He has appeared in federal and state courts across the United States handling the trial and evidentiary hearing defense of multidistrict antitrust class actions, “bet-the-company” lawsuits, and contract and business tort disputes arising from clients' commercial activities. As lead trial counsel, Mr. Bizar recently obtained a defense verdict following a six week federal jury trial of an antitrust class action that exonerated his client of the charges it had participated in a conspiracy to reduce the domestic supply and raise the price of shell eggs. In another significant win, Mr. Bizar secured a comprehensive jury verdict in favor of his client, a leading vendor finance company, in a Pennsylvania state court case arising from a former executive’s misappropriation of trade secrets and violation of contractual obligations related to his separation. Mr. Bizar has spent nearly fifty days on trial before federal and state court juries during 2018. Mr. Bizar has substantial appellate experience and has secured wins in the areas of class certification, antitrust, securities fraud pleading standards, full faith and credit/res judicata and forum non conveniens. He has handled international arbitrations through to award under the procedural rules of leading arbitral institutions, including the AAA-ICDR and ICC. Mr. Bizar also represents clients in connection with government antitrust and securities fraud investigations, including criminal investigations, and in enforcement and other proceedings before agencies and self-regulatory organizations.
Noted as “one of the go-to lawyers for antitrust defense,” Mr. Bizar is consistently ranked for antitrust (Band 1) and general commercial litigation (Band 1) by Chambers and Partners USA, where he has been described as “an aggressive and fearless litigator” with a “great killer instinct” and “strong trial skills.” Recently, Mr. Bizar was featured as one of the National Law Journal’s Winning Litigators, one of a select group of lawyers who won big victories for clients in high-stake trials during the prior 18 months. ThePhiladelphia Business Journal also named him among the Best of the Bar in the Business Litigation category.
Mr. Bizar is a Fellow of the International Academy of Trial Lawyers and the American Bar Foundation, both invitation-only honorary organizations that use a rigorous vetting process to select legal professionals who have demonstrated outstanding skill and ability as well as a dedication to advancing justice within their own communities and promoting the rule of law internationally. He is listed in Benchmark Litigation’s Top 100 Trial Lawyers, The Best Lawyers in America, Best Lawyers in Philadelphia and Global Competition Review's Who's Who for antitrust law and is listed regularly on the Pennsylvania Super Lawyers and the Corporate Counsel Super Lawyers lists. In 2015, the National Law Journal recognized Mr. Bizar as a “Mergers & Acquisitions and Antitrust Trailblazer.” BTI Consulting has also named him a Client Service All-Star three times, in 2019, 2015, and 2008. “All-Stars” represent the epitome of client service and are named by legal decision makers at organizations with US$1 billion or more in revenue. For independent and unbiased research, no law firm or organization other than BTI sponsors this study.
Mr. Bizar is a frequent author and commentator regarding antitrust litigation in the chemicals, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, commercial agriculture, and vitamin industries. He is the author of Pennsylvania Motion Practice (ALM Press), now in its Fourth Edition. He has been featured in Bloomberg, Concurrences, Global Competition Review, Law360, Los Angeles Times, The Associated Press, Reuters, The Chicago Tribune, The Legal Intelligencer, The National Law Journal, The Philadelphia Business Journal, and other prominent legal publications as well as on the regional television program Law Journal TV.
In the community, Mr. Bizar recently completed a two year term as President of the Philadelphia Bar Foundation, the charitable arm of the Philadelphia legal community whose mission is to ensure that the underprivileged have equal access to justice and publicly available services. He also just completed a two year term as a member of the Board of Governors of the Philadelphia Bar Association. A former chair of the Philadelphia Bar Association’s Federal Courts and State Civil Rules Committees, Mr. Bizar also serves as an investigative team member for its Commission on the Selection and Retention of Judges, which evaluates candidates for the state bench. He is a Member of the Columbia Law School’s Board of Visitors.
Prior to joining Dechert, Mr. Bizar served as an executive shareholder and litigation shareholder at another national law firm, where he focused on business disputes and class action defense, including at trial, of antitrust, securities fraud, and complex commercial cases.
Steven E. Bizar, Co-leader of the antitrust/competition practice, is a first chair trial lawyer well regarded for his success in the defense of antitrust class action and Section 1 Sherman act cases and his trial of complex commercial disputes in court and before arbitrators. He has three decades of experience spanning a diverse range of antitrust and trade regulation, contract and business tort, government investigation, insurance and reinsurance, securities and corporate governance matters. Mr. Bizar regularly represents multinational and domestic companies, partnerships, and individuals, including officers and directors, on issues arising across a broad spectrum of industries, including chemicals, banking and financial services, construction materials, health insurance, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, wholesale distribution, gaming, agricultural products, technology, and… Continue Reading
Defending a generic pharmaceuticals manufacturer against claims by various groups of plaintiffs that it engaged in a price-fixing conspiracy.
Defended an egg producer as lead trial counsel in a six week federal trial of the direct purchaser class action plaintiffs’ US$1.1 Billion damages claim (before trebling), resulting in a defense verdict and a jury finding that his client had not participated in a supply reduction/price fixing conspiracy.
Defended a leading gypsum wallboard manufacturer as lead and liaison counsel in antitrust suits filed by direct, indirect and opt-out purchasers.
Defended a leading vision benefits company in an antitrust class action accusing it of depressing the reimbursements paid to optometrists and other eyecare providers, resulting in the dismissal of the lawsuit.
Defended a leading milk processor as lead trial counsel against claims of price-fixing by a large supermarket chain and a convenience store owner resulting in a favorable settlement.
Resolved a claim against a Swedish telecommunications firm for no money or admission of liability in an antitrust case challenging its conduct in a standards setting organization.
Argued the successful Rule 23(f) appeal resulting in the decertification of a class of hydrogen peroxide purchasers and the clarification of class certification standards in a landmark ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in a Sherman Act §1 case.
Defeated class certification after a three-day evidentiary hearing in a federal antitrust class action claiming price-fixing for plastics additives under Sherman Act § 1.
Defended a prominent discount retailer against state law unfair competition claims.
Defended a pharmacy benefits manager against putative class action claims asserted under §1 of the Sherman Act based on alleged conspiracies with other pharmacy benefits managers and with their respective clients to depress the prices paid to independent retail pharmacies for filling prescriptions.
Defeated an antitrust claim brought under Sherman Act § 1 against a hospital system alleging involvement in conspiracy to depress salaries of registered nurses in the Albany, New York area.
Defended a multi-state Catholic hospital system, on putative class action claims alleging price gouging in its affiliated hospital’s pricing of health care services to the uninsured.
Defeated a claim by a putative class of foreign purchasers of the chemical product MCAA brought under Sherman Act §1.
Defended a French multinational chemical manufacturing company against direct and indirect purchaser and opt-out class action antitrust lawsuits filed in federal and state courts across the country challenging its activities with regard to four categories of products.
Represented a pharmaceutical wholesaler in a US$11 billion antitrust class action lawsuit and 100 opt-out lawsuits, including three summary judgment motions, an 11-week jury trial in federal court in Chicago, and three separate appeals to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
Defended an antitrust “group boycott” lawsuit against a pharmaceutical distributor, resulting in a dismissal on a Rule 12 motion.
Counseled various clients on distribution issues under the Sherman and Robinson-Patman Acts.
Developed and implemented antitrust compliance and training programs for clients in various industries, including chemicals, building materials and wholesale distribution.
Representing a leading health care insurer as plaintiff in a civil RICO and fraud lawsuit.
Represented a leading vendor finance company as plaintiff and counter-claim defendant in the successful jury trial of a Pennsylvania state court case arising from a former executive’s misappropriation of trade secrets and violation of contractual obligations upon his separation from the company.
Represented a gaming company in a Constitutional challenge to state gaming expansion legislation.
Defended the Secretary of State for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through two successful summary judgment motions and a Pennsylvania Supreme Court argument and victory against a lawsuit challenging the process used to certify direct recording electronic voting systems for use in Pennsylvania.
Represented a French respondent in defeating a US$28 million claim in an AAA-ICDR arbitration in New York brought by a U.S. claimant for cancellation of a geographic product swap agreement.
Represented Cook Composites and Polymers in a five-week federal jury trial stemming from a US$405 million lawsuit, before trebling, filed by Viking Yacht Company and Post Marine, resulting in a complete trial victory upheld on appeal.
Represented a foreign manufacturer as plaintiff against the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Service on a case in which the U.S. Court of International Trade found that the client’s inkjet colorant products were being misclassified as dyes instead of inks under the Harmonized Tariff, resulting in lower duties.
Defended a logistics services company in a federal securities fraud class action lawsuit which resulted in a dismissal, later affirmed on appeal.
Defended directors and officers of a Fortune 25 company in shareholder derivative lawsuits.
Defended a corporate client in a shareholder derivative case of first impression, which established that §304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act does not provide a private right of action for disgorgement against a corporate client's CEO and CFO.
Represented the Board of Directors of a major corporation in derivative lawsuits and a Delaware Section 220 books and records proceedings based on the equity compensation awarded to the company’s CEO.
Vindicated a foreign reinsurer's contractual rights in multi-state insurance company insolvency proceedings and in reinsurance contract litigation.
Tried an adversary proceeding in federal bankruptcy court challenging a client's decision not to close a multimillion-dollar asset purchase transaction.
Defended a hospital system against class and collective action lawsuits under the FLSA and analogous state statutes.
Obtained a mandatory TRO in Delaware Chancery Court requiring one of the world's largest chemical manufacturers to supply his client a key chemical monomer despite its force majeure declaration.
Defended French and American chemical manufacturers in disputes in Texas state court and in arbitration with one of the world’s largest chemical manufacturers over supply, swap, plant investment, and plant services agreements.
Represented a leading chemical manufacturing firm as claimant and counter-respondent in an ICC arbitration with a Korean firm and its U.S. affiliate arising from alleged breaches of joint development and sale and purchase agreements.
Defended a multinational specialty chemical manufacturing company in a multimillion-dollar dispute with two former distributors of its EPA-regulated product.
Defended a chemical manufacturing firm against breach of contract and business tort claims based on a customer’s dissatisfaction with its resin product.
Defended a leading industrial gas manufacturer against a breach of contract claim in state court arising from an allocation following a force majeure declaration.
Prosecuted claims in Pennsylvania state court for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction barring the misappropriation of trade secrets on behalf of a pharmaceutical manufacturer.
Defended a biotech manufacturing company in an AAA arbitration against alleged breach of warranty and fraud claims stemming from its manufacture of active pharmaceutical ingredients.
Defended a pharmaceutical wholesaler against a breach of contract/fraud lawsuit in federal court in New Jersey.
Banfield, et al. v. Cortes, Secretary of the Commonwealth, 110 A.3d 155 (Pa. 2015) and 51 A.3d 300 (Comm. Ct. 2012).
Missouri River Historical Development, Inc. v. Penn National Gaming, Inc., 283 F.R.D. 501 (N.D. IA 2012).