Update June 2010: The Third Circuit rejected the dealer’s appeal on grounds that the court admitted irrelevant prejudicial evidence.
In an Eastern District of Pennsylvania case, a Mack Truck dealer alleged that Mack oversaw a conspiracy among its dealers to maintain truck prices and to discipline any dealer that, like plaintiff Toledo Mack, sought to pursue and aggressive price cutting strategy. A jury recently rejected the conspiracy claim, ruling in favor of Mack Truck.