Eric P. Enson

Partner

Overview

Consistently recognized by Chambers, Best Lawyers in America, and The Legal 500 as a leading competition lawyer, clients turn to Eric Enson for his extensive antitrust litigation and counseling experience. Eric represents clients in all manner of antitrust claims, such as complex international cartel investigations and antitrust class actions, including major jury trials. Eric’s experience extends to matters involving claims of monopolization and other types of unilateral conduct.

Eric has decades of experience responding to Department of Justice investigations of alleged collusion and follow-on civil litigation. His practice focuses heavily on defending clients against claims of price-fixing in the computer components, technology, healthcare, capacitors, optical disk drive, auto parts, semiconductors, and packaged ice industries, as well as in a number of nonpublic criminal proceedings.

Eric has tried antitrust cases in federal and state courts. He served as trial counsel for Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in an antitrust lawsuit alleging an unlawful group boycott, on which a jury returned a full defense verdict. Eric was also part of the trial team that obtained a full defense jury verdict on antitrust claims filed against Macy's in In re Tableware. He also routinely handles arbitrations before the American Arbitration Association International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR).

Eric has repeatedly testified before the California Senate and Assembly Judiciary Committees and the California Law Revision Commission on various topics, such as proposed changes to California’s antitrust laws and regulation of algorithmic and dynamic pricing. He serves as an advisor to the Executive Committee of the Antitrust and Consumer Protection Section of the California Lawyers Association and is an active member of the ABA Antitrust Law Section, frequently writing and speaking about novel competition issues.

Career & Education

    • Loyola Law School, Los Angeles, J.D., cum laude, 1999
    • Baylor University , B.B.A., Economics, 1995
    • Loyola Law School, Los Angeles, J.D., cum laude, 1999
    • Baylor University , B.B.A., Economics, 1995
    • California
    • California
    • Advisor, Executive Committee, Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section, California State Bar
    • Member, ABA Antitrust Law Section
    • Advisor, Executive Committee, Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section, California State Bar
    • Member, ABA Antitrust Law Section

Eric's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 09.30.26

The COMPETE Act Becomes Law – What the New Antitrust Law Means For California Businesses

California AB 1776 (Aguiar-Curry) — dubbed “The Competition and Opportunity in Markets for a Prosperous, Equitable and Transparent Economy (COMPETE) Act” — was signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom, on September 30, 2026. The new law, which takes effect on January 1, 2027, bans single-firm monopolization, making it “unlawful for every person to monopolize or monopsonize, attempt to monopolize or monopsonize, maintain a monopoly or monopsony, or combine or conspire with another person to monopolize or monopsonize any part of trade or commerce.” Crowell & Moring served as counsel to the California Chamber of Commerce (CalChamber) throughout the legislative process, advising on the bill’s impact and advocating for critical amendments designed to preserve competition and innovation in California....

Representative Matters

  • Served as trial counsel for RE/MAX, LLC leading to a nationwide settlement of multiple class actions related to commissions in residential real estate transactions.
  • Obtained closure without further action of a DOJ grand jury investigation regarding alleged price fixing of certain building materials.
  • Represented Union Pacific Railroad Company in multi-district antitrust litigation involving claims of an alleged conspiracy among the major U.S. freight railroads to fix fuel surcharges in In re Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation.
  • Obtained closure without further action of DOJ grand jury investigation of alleged price fixing of certain consumer products.
  • Represented the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) in an Independent Review Process (IRP) under the ICDR rules challenging the removal of price caps in .ORG, .BIZ, and .INFO.
  • Defended Taiwanese and Japanese manufacturers of electrolytic capacitors in worldwide investigations of alleged price fixing of capacitors and follow-on civil litigation in In re Capacitors Antitrust Litigation.
  • Defended a Japanese manufacturer of auto parts in a global investigation of alleged industry collusion and follow-on civil litigation in In re Auto Parts Antitrust Litigation.
  • Represented ICANN in an Independent Review Process (IRP) under the ICDR Rules relating to an ICANN-administered auction and subsequent award of the .WEB top-level domain for $135 million.
  • Executed the successful defense of Sherwin Williams against antitrust counter claims regarding its national distribution system.
  • Represented a Japanese computer components manufacturer in multiple class actions alleging price fixing of optical disk drives in Optical Disk Drive Antitrust Litigation.
  • Represented U.S. Chamber of Commerce in a successful antitrust challenge to Seattle for-hire driver collective-bargaining ordinance
  • Obtained the dismissal of a long-running lawsuit filed by a California distributor challenging The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company's termination of its dealer contracts as breaches of contracts, tortious interference, and violations of California unfair competition and federal antitrust law.
  • Successfully defended ICANN against claims of monopolization of top-level domains, which was affirmed on appeal in a landmark antitrust decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
  • Served as trial counsel for Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in a two-month antitrust jury trial, resulting in a complete defense verdict that was affirmed on appeal.
  • Represented pharmaceutical manufacturer Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in an antitrust action brought by California pharmacies claiming that Boehringer Ingelheim and other drug companies conspired to inflate drug prices in the United States and keep lower-priced Canadian drugs off the market.

Eric's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 09.30.26

The COMPETE Act Becomes Law – What the New Antitrust Law Means For California Businesses

California AB 1776 (Aguiar-Curry) — dubbed “The Competition and Opportunity in Markets for a Prosperous, Equitable and Transparent Economy (COMPETE) Act” — was signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom, on September 30, 2026. The new law, which takes effect on January 1, 2027, bans single-firm monopolization, making it “unlawful for every person to monopolize or monopsonize, attempt to monopolize or monopsonize, maintain a monopoly or monopsony, or combine or conspire with another person to monopolize or monopsonize any part of trade or commerce.” Crowell & Moring served as counsel to the California Chamber of Commerce (CalChamber) throughout the legislative process, advising on the bill’s impact and advocating for critical amendments designed to preserve competition and innovation in California....

Recognition

  • The Best Lawyers in America: Lawyer of the Year, Litigation – Antitrust, Los Angeles, 2027
  • Best Lawyers in America: Antitrust Law and Litigation – Antitrust
  • Chambers USA: Antitrust – California
  • Lawdragon: 500 Leading Lawyers in America, Antitrust & Competition Law
  • The Legal 500 US: Cartel/Antitrust Litigation
  • Daily Journal: Top 20 Lawyers Under 40, California
  • Law360: Rising Star Under 40, Competition Law

Eric's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 09.30.26

The COMPETE Act Becomes Law – What the New Antitrust Law Means For California Businesses

California AB 1776 (Aguiar-Curry) — dubbed “The Competition and Opportunity in Markets for a Prosperous, Equitable and Transparent Economy (COMPETE) Act” — was signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom, on September 30, 2026. The new law, which takes effect on January 1, 2027, bans single-firm monopolization, making it “unlawful for every person to monopolize or monopsonize, attempt to monopolize or monopsonize, maintain a monopoly or monopsony, or combine or conspire with another person to monopolize or monopsonize any part of trade or commerce.” Crowell & Moring served as counsel to the California Chamber of Commerce (CalChamber) throughout the legislative process, advising on the bill’s impact and advocating for critical amendments designed to preserve competition and innovation in California....

Eric's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 09.30.26

The COMPETE Act Becomes Law – What the New Antitrust Law Means For California Businesses

California AB 1776 (Aguiar-Curry) — dubbed “The Competition and Opportunity in Markets for a Prosperous, Equitable and Transparent Economy (COMPETE) Act” — was signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom, on September 30, 2026. The new law, which takes effect on January 1, 2027, bans single-firm monopolization, making it “unlawful for every person to monopolize or monopsonize, attempt to monopolize or monopsonize, maintain a monopoly or monopsony, or combine or conspire with another person to monopolize or monopsonize any part of trade or commerce.” Crowell & Moring served as counsel to the California Chamber of Commerce (CalChamber) throughout the legislative process, advising on the bill’s impact and advocating for critical amendments designed to preserve competition and innovation in California....