David Scupp
Partner
An experienced litigator, David Scupp guides businesses and individuals through high-stakes antitrust and complex commercial disputes, including individual and class actions, arbitrations and appeals. David represents plaintiffs and defendants in state and federal courts, with experience across a range of industries, including payments, financial services, pharmaceuticals, and technology.
Clients hire David when they need a vigorous advocate for challenging, bet-the-company cases. A significant portion of his practice focuses on litigating claims under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, including allegations of illegal conspiracies and cartels. In these matters, David works closely with clients to develop and execute aggressive litigation strategies aligned with their business objectives – often driving meaningful change within an industry.
David represents clients of all sizes. He served as counsel to more than 65 of the nation’s largest merchants as antitrust plaintiffs in litigation against payment card networks and the country’s largest card-issuing banks. He has also represented early-stage startups and small businesses in disputes with dominant industry players. On the defense side, David has litigated matters for clients in industries including private equity, international banking, and government contracting.
In his complex commercial practice, David advises and advocates for clients in disputes involving trade secrets, defamation, breach of contract, and director and officer fiduciary duties.
David also regularly counsels clients contemplating or facing litigation, helping them resolve their disputes efficiently and, where possible, amicably, without court involvement.
- In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation. David represented over 65 of the nation’s largest merchants as antitrust plaintiffs in litigation against payment card networks and issuing banks.
- Linkable Networks, Inc. v. Mastercard Incorporated. David represented a technology company alleging misappropriation of trade secrets in the digital marketing space. David acted as the first-chair attorney at trial and obtained a jury verdict on liability.
- E.M. Glass Network, Inc. v. Mygrant Glass Company. David represented an aftermarket auto glass wholesaler in federal antitrust litigation alleging a group boycott. The claims against all seven defendants were resolved prior to trial.
- Visa International Service Association v. BankIslami Pakistan Limited. David defended a Pakistani bank in a breach of contract action related to a cash-out ATM attack. The case was resolved prior to trial and dismissed with prejudice.
- Counsel to independent pharmacies. David has counseled numerous independent pharmacies in antitrust and commercial disputes, including in litigation and arbitration, against pharmacy benefit managers.
- Rapp v. Emigrant Capital Corp. David defended a private equity firm, its portfolio beverage companies and their former directors in a shareholder derivative action.
- Kearse v. Kaplan, Inc. David defended a leading test preparation company in an antitrust class action, successfully obtaining dismissal at the pleading stage.
- Mitre Sports International Limited v. Home Box Office, Inc. David advised a U.K.-based sportswear and equipment manufacturer in defamation action against a premium cable network.
- Meyer v. Kalanick. David represented a putative class of riders in an antitrust action against a ride-hailing company.
- David defended a large government contractor in confidential international arbitration proceedings
Bar Admissions
New York
Eastern District of New York
Southern District of New York
Education
University of Virginia School of Law, J.D. (2005)
University of Virginia, B.S. — commerce (2002)
Media Mentions
“Auto glass wholesaler’s boycott suit teed up for trial,” Law360 (March 20, 2023)
“Auto glass wholesaler’s boycott suit survives dismissal bid,” Law360 (Jan. 31, 2020)
“Auto glass wholesaler accuses rivals of staging boycott,” Law360 (Feb. 7, 2019)
“David Stern: 2011-12 NBA season ‘really in jeopardy,’” CBS (Nov. 15, 2011)
“NBA players reject offer, Stern says ‘season is really in jeopardy,’” New York Post (Nov. 14, 2011)
“NBA players reject league’s labor offer,” Fox Sports (Nov. 14, 2011)
“NBA union faces tough fight in antitrust lawsuit,” The Denver Post (Nov. 14, 2011)
“A 50-50 split may be best offer players get,” ESPN.com (Nov. 4, 2011)
“Lawyers will be the stars as NFL labor battle goes back in session,” The Florida Times-Union (June 2, 2011)
“Two skilled lawyers ready to square off in NFL labor case,” Los Angeles Times (April 5, 2011)
“NFLPA’s legal move shifts to courtroom,” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (April 5, 2011)
“Antitrust lawyer believes owners are in a tough spot following ruling,” The Florida Times-Union (April 26, 2011)
Speeches
“The Uber case: The future of consumer arbitration?,” American Bar Association (March 2018)
“Antitrust issues in sports,” New York Law School Sports Law Symposium (March 2016)
“US v. AmEx: Reflections and remedies,” New York State Bar Association Antitrust Law Section Vertical Restraints Committee (July 2015)
“Student loan case could lead to antitrust standing changes,” (with Matthew Cantor), Law360 (April 5, 2023)
“FTC seeks to maintain the neutrality of the ‘Switzerland’ of the computing industry by suing to block Nvidia’s deal to buy arm,” Antitrust Today (Dec. 9, 2021)
“Republican FTC commissioners issue dissenting statement on use of prior approval provisions in merger orders,” Antitrust Today (Nov. 3, 2021)
“FTC trial seeks to promote competition in cancer-screening tests by unwinding Illumina-GRAIL merger,” Antitrust Today (Aug. 30, 2021)
“Federal court rules soccer promoter’s antitrust claims out of bounds,” Antitrust Today (July 22, 2021)
“Supreme Court slams NCAA’s ‘procompetitive rationale’ in unanimous ruling,” (with Wyatt Fore), Antitrust Today (July 1, 2021)
“NCAA’s loss in O’Bannon trial may be only a partial victory for competition,” Antitrust Today (Aug. 13, 2014)
“The hypocrisy of big-time college sports,” CNN.com (April 1, 2014)
“The end of the amateur athlete,” Law360 (Nov. 9, 2011)
“NBA v. NBPA: Tactical strike or tactical blunder?,” Law360 (Sept. 20, 2011)
“We’ve been here before, and football on Sundays survived,” Street & Smith’s Sports Business Journal (May 9, 2011)
“The real March Madness: The failed BCS championship and why the antitrust laws are not the answer,” Law360 (March 17, 2011)
“Decertification: The NFLPA and NBPA’s nuclear option,” Law360 (Jan. 18, 2011)
“Antitrust laws do not provide answer to reforming BCS,” Street & Smith’s Sports Business Journal (Aug. 23, 2010)
