1. Home
  2. |Professionals
  3. |Paige Etherington

Paige Etherington

Senior Law Clerk | She/Her/Hers
Senior Law Clerk | She/Her/Hers
cGV0aGVyaW5ndG9uQGNyb3dlbGwuY29t
VCard
VCard

Areas of Focus

Overview

Paige Etherington helps companies facing antitrust litigation and non-merger investigations involving monopolization, price-fixing, exclusive agreements, information-sharing schemes, and related competition issues. A former assistant attorney general in the Office of the Texas Attorney General, she brings firsthand government enforcement experience to high-stakes matters across the sports, healthcare, technology, agribusiness, and construction materials industries. Clients benefit from her practical understanding of how antitrust investigations are built, developed, and litigated.

At the Office of the Texas Attorney General, Paige led and supported numerous government investigations into alleged anticompetitive conduct, including matters involving horizontal agreements among competitors, exclusive dealing, serial acquisitions, and other vertical restraints. Her work included major investigations in the sports, healthcare, and technology industries and in the ecosystem of algorithm-informed pricing tools, giving her broad industry insight and a strong command of evolving competition theories.

Paige also brings a distinctive perspective on sports-related competition issues. During law school, she served as senior business editor of the Sports Lawyers Journal, served on the board of the Tulane Professional Basketball Negotiation Competition, and contributed to Professor Gabe Feldman’s scholarship published in the Harvard Law School Journal of Sports & Entertainment Law. Before law school, she was a Division I collegiate volleyball player, an experience that further informs her understanding of the sports and entertainment landscape.

Career & Education

    • Office of the Texas Attorney General
      Assistant Attorney General
    • Office of the Texas Attorney General
      Assistant Attorney General

    • Tulane University School of Law, 2024
    • University of Texas at Austin, 2020
    • Tulane University School of Law, 2024
    • University of Texas at Austin, 2020

    • Texas
    • *Admitted in Texas only. Practicing under the supervision of Illinois bar members.
    • Texas
    • *Admitted in Texas only. Practicing under the supervision of Illinois bar members.

Representative Matters

  • Represented the State of Texas in monopolization litigation against a live entertainment company and a ticketing company, alleging anticompetitive conduct across the markets for primary ticketing services, concert promotion services, and the use of large amphitheaters. Following trial, a federal jury found the defendants liable on every antitrust count submitted, including monopolization of primary ticketing markets and unlawful tying and bundling, and awarded $1.72 for each primary concert ticket sold in connection with the challenged conduct.
  • Represented the State of Texas in antitrust litigation against two crop protection companies, alleging that they used distributor “loyalty programs” to foreclose competing generic pesticide manufacturers, maintain monopoly power, and inflate prices paid by farmers. The plaintiff states and the FTC later secured a proposed $35 million settlement with one of the companies that would end its challenged loyalty program and prohibit it from conditioning benefits on customers limiting purchases of generic equivalents.
  • Represented the State of Texas in a case under Section 1 of the Sherman Act against an agricultural data company, alleging that it facilitated an unlawful information exchange among broiler chicken, pork, and turkey processors by collecting and distributing competitively sensitive data. The matter resolved in a proposed settlement providing monetary relief to the states and injunctive relief that bars sharing of certain non-public pricing and other competitively sensitive information, requires access for interested domestic buyers on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms, imposes timing restrictions, and mandates compliance monitoring and an antitrust compliance program.