Judge's Dismissal of Verdict in Cox Set-Top Class-Action Complaint To Be Appealed
An appeal is planned after a federal judge overturned a $6.31 million jury verdict against Cox Communications for its set-top box rental policies. "We feel confident that the Tenth Circuit will reverse the decision and reinstate the verdict," Todd Schneider…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
of Schneider Wallace, lead plaintiff's attorney in the case, told us in an email Friday. U.S. District Judge Robin Cauthron of Oklahoma City ruled Thursday that despite the jury verdict to the contrary earlier this month (see 1511020048), the class-action complainants failed to offer evidence that would show that the tying of a Cox Premium Cable subscription to renting of a Cox set-top box "foreclosed a substantial volume of commerce in Oklahoma City to other sellers or potential sellers of set-top boxes in the market for set-top boxes." That was one of the five elements set out in the jury instructions in order for it to find against Cox, the judge's order said. It said class-action plaintiffs Richard Healy et al "failed to offer evidence from which a jury could determine that any other manufacturer wished to sell set-top boxes at retail or that Cox had acted in a manner to prevent any other manufacturer from selling set-top boxes at retail." The plaintiffs also failed to prove, as also set out in the jury instructions, that there was any loss or injury from that tying arrangement, the judge said. Cauthron's order followed a motion by Cox to have the jury verdict overturned. In a statement Friday, Cox said its "primary goal is to provide its customers with high value video services and this victory ensures that Cox will be free to continue to provide those services in the future. We are pleased that the Court has recognized that Cox’s conduct did not violate the antitrust laws."