Larry Dougherty’s note,  Does a Cartel Aim Expressly? Trusting Calder Personal Jurisdiction When Antitrust Goes Global, has won the ABA Antitrust Section writing prize for the best antitrust note written by a law school student.

In Calder v. Jones, the Supreme Court upheld an “effects test” as a way to obtain personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants in a libel action. Plaintiffs have borrowed Calder’s concept of “express aiming” to obtain personal jurisdiction against parties defending suits for other intentional torts, including antitrust violations. But the broad-based nature of much anticompetitive conduct raises the question of whether a price-fixing scheme or monopolistic activity can be “expressly aimed” at another forum. Larry Dougherty’s Note Does a Cartel Aim Expressly? Trusting Calder Personal Jurisdiction When Antitrust Goes Global 60 Fla. L. Rev. 915, examines the ways in which effects test jurisdiction both fails and succeeds in antitrust matters, against the backdrop of the ever-increasing globalization of international trade and competition policy.