Beatrice C. Romero and Michael Ferree

Summary

The New Mexico Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeals applied the correct state summary-judgment standard but incorrectly applied federal substantive antitrust law. In an oligopoly, parallel wholesale price increases are ambiguous and cannot alone support an inference of a price-fixing agreement; plaintiffs relying on circumstantial evidence must present evidence tending to exclude independent conduct. Because Plaintiffs failed to do so, the court reversed the Court of Appeals and affirmed summary judgment for Defendants.