Zaremba Family Farms, Inc., et al. v. Encana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc.

The Court of Appeals found there was sufficient evidence that Respondent Encana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc. conspired with Chesapeake Energy to allocate markets and depress the prices paid for oil and gas interests in northern Michigan in October, 2010. There was evidence that Petitioners' interests had a value of at least $1,505.15 per acre in May 2010, and that Respondent paid on average $3,055.60 per acre in the relevant area at that same time. But, as a result of Respondent's and Chesapeake's collusion, Petitioners' interests lost significant value and were only worth $35.21 per acre in October .2010. Petitioners argued that the unlawful anticompetitive scheme between Respondent and Chesapeake deprived them of the opportunity to sell their interests at a fair price in a competitive market. . The Court of Appeals held that Petitioners failed to demonstrate an injury-in-fact because they did not try to lease their oil and gas rights in the market with artificially depressed prices. Question Presented: Whether proof of the fact of damage—a significant drop in the value of a plaintiffs oil and gas interests— because of an illegal, anticompetitive agreement, is sufficient to establish an injury-in-fact giving rise to a private cause of action, under 15 U.S.C. § 15(a), without, as a prerequisite, requiring the antitrust plaintiff to, sell its oil and gas interests in an artificially rigged market. (i)