The USG and TIN, along with Lafarge and TIN, have settled a Drywall Price Fixing Lawsuit. During the class period, between 2006 and 2011, Drywall prices declined by 35 percent. Yet the companies kept their prices substantially higher despite a significant overcapacity in the industry. These defendant companies have agreed to settle the lawsuit to avoid costly litigation. But they can still opt out of the settlement or object to it.

Indirect purchaser class

The plaintiffs in an Indirect Purchaser Class in a drywall price-fixing lawsuit claim that the defendants engaged in a nationwide conspiracy to fix drywall prices. This class action is based on several structural elements and oligopolistic behavior, as well as a set of plus factors. In his report, Dr. Hausman argues that a conspiracy to fix prices cannot be measured on a classwide basis, even though the price increases were intended to affect all customers in the United States.

The Defendants also argue that the Plaintiffs are not “similarly situated” with the customers of the defendants, which includes the two-tiered market for gypsum. While the Plaintiffs purchased drywall from L & W, they were largely uninvolved in the litigation. In contrast, Defendants sold drywall to large mass merchandisers and gypsum specialty dealers. In other words, they are not “similarly situated.” The plaintiffs contend that this does not prevent a class from being created, but rather defeats the class.

Class period

Defendants in the Drywall price-fixing lawsuit deny any wrongdoing and assert that the plaintiffs lack antitrust standing. The plaintiffs, Grubb Lumber, Sierra Drywall, and Janicki Drywall did not purchase drywall from the Defendants directly during the class period but instead purchased it from L & W Supply Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of USG Corp. Plaintiffs New Deal Lumber and Sierra Drywall obtained their claim through an invalid assignment.

The drywall price-fixing lawsuits alleged that a group of manufacturers conspired to fix the price of gypsum board throughout the United States. The plaintiffs sought damages for overcharges and injunctive relief against the defendants. In addition to a settlement, the plaintiffs sought injunctive relief. However, most of the defendants have denied the allegations and agreed to settle the drywall price-fixing class action lawsuit. The defendant’s can opt-out of the settlement or object to it.