William DeVinney

Counsel

Washington, D.C.
T +1.202.861.1554
F +1.202.861.1783

Overview

William DeVinney has a broad litigation practice that includes antitrust, intellectual property, commercial class action, securities and other complex commercial litigation. He has extensive trial experience, both as a member of trial teams and as first chair in jury and bench trials, arbitrations proceedings and regulatory hearings, and has argued cases before several federal and state appellate courts. William also counsels clients on antitrust issues.

Select Experience

  • Member of a team representing a certified class of dairy farmers located in 14 southeastern states against Dairy Farmers of America, Dean Foods and a number of other defendants in an action alleging violations of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act by unlawfully conspiring to eliminate competition for the marketing, sale and purchase of raw milk in the Southeast. Litigation was settled for more than 70 percent of the alleged damages.
  • Represented a multinational consumer goods company in a consumer class action alleging false advertising. The complaint against the client was dismissed with prejudice.
More »

Experience

  • Member of a team representing a certified class of dairy farmers located in 14 southeastern states against Dairy Farmers of America, Dean Foods and a number of other defendants in an action alleging violations of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act by unlawfully conspiring to eliminate competition for the marketing, sale and purchase of raw milk in the Southeast. Litigation was settled for more than 70 percent of the alleged damages.
  • Represented a multinational consumer goods company in a consumer class action alleging false advertising. The complaint against the client was dismissed with prejudice.
  • Represented a multinational chemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation against a Sherman Act Section 2 claim brought by a competitor alleging that the client had either monopolized or attempted to monopolize the alleged market for transgenic corn seed.
  • Defended a multinational chemical and agricultural biotechnology company accused of monopolizing the market for the transgenic corn seed industry. A motion for class certification by the plaintiff was rejected by the trial court and before the Third Circuit on appeal.
  • Represented a multinational technology company in a private antitrust claim brought by a competitor, as well as in investigations brought by the European Union, the Federal Trade Commission and state government enforcement agencies.
  • Defended a former executive of Bankers Trust Corp. in a criminal trial and related Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) administrative proceedings arising from the alleged improper accounting treatment of unclaimed funds. After a six-week jury trial, the client was acquitted of all 36 counts in the indictment and a favorable settlement was reached with the SEC.
  • Successfully defended a manufacturing company against Lanham Act false-advertising claims brought by a competitor, using discovery to formulate counterclaims that forced the competitor to drop its claims and agree to a $7.5 million-dollar settlement in the client’s favor and other corrective actions to create a level playing field; also persuaded court to sanction competitor’s in-house general counsel for unethical conduct in bringing claims against client. Scranton Products, Inc. v. Bobrick Washroom Equipment, Inc., No. 2014-cv-00853 (M.D. Pa.).
  • In representation of shopping center developer, formulated cutting-edge antitrust claim against competing developer and supermarket chain for unlawful agreement to restrain trade in local supermarket sector; complaint withstood aggressive motions to dismiss, with court ruling that it pled a plausible prima facie case under the Sherman Act and various related state-law causes of action, and that client is entitled to full discovery on its claims.

Recognitions and Memberships

Pro Bono

  • Served as lead counsel for three congressional representatives and a public interest group filing an amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court.
  • Has represented several clients in fair housing cases in antidiscrimination, fair housing, landlord/tenant and contractual disputes.

Admissions

  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
  • U.S. District Court, District of Columbia
  • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
  • District of Columbia
  • New York

Education

  • J.D., William & Mary Law School, 1998
  • B.S., Cornell University, 1991

Blog

In The Blogs

Previous Next
Antitrust Advocate
Ohio v. American Express: The Supreme Court Credits American Express’s Anti-Steering Provisions
July 10, 2018
In a 5-4 decision in Ohio v. American Express, the Supreme Court affirmed that the anti-steering provisions of American Express’s merchant agreement do not violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Credit card companies’ core business involves...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
Carl Hittinger, Tyson Herrold Author Article that Assesses Congressional Attempts to Update FTC Merger Review Process
By Tyson Y. Herrold, Carl W. Hittinger
June 27, 2018
Partner Carl Hittinger and Associate Tyson Herrold authored an article published June 22, 2018, by The Legal Intelligencer. The article, “How Smart is the Proposed Merger Review SMARTER Act?,” discusses a long-awaited bill before Congress...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
Did You Know the ‘Plausibility' Standard Can Be Used for More Than Pleading Antitrust Claims?
By Danyll W. Foix
June 26, 2018
Partners Robert Abrams, Gregory Commins, and Danyll Foix authored an article published in the Global Competition Review’s “The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2018.” Their article reviews how the “plausibility” pleading standard announced...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
Class Actions Now Flowing From FTC and DOJ's No-Poach Enforcement
By Tyson Y. Herrold, Carl W. Hittinger
May 15, 2018
Partner Carl Hittinger and Associate Tyson Herrold authored an article published by The Legal Intelligencer on May 5, 2018. The article, “Class Actions Now Flowing from FTC and DOJ’s No-Poach Enforcement,” discusses the increase of class...
Read More ->
Antitrust Advocate
The Department of Justice Weighs In on the Application of North Carolina Dental Examiners to the Florida State Bar
By William DeVinney
March 23, 2018
The Department of Justice (DOJ) recently took the uncommon step of submitting an amicus brief to weigh in on a motion to dismiss. TIKD Services, LLC v. The Florida Bar, No. 1:17-cv-24103 (S.D. Fla. filed Nov. 8, 2017), Dkt. 115...
Read More ->