Berger & Montague P.C.

Daniel Berger is a senior member of the Philadelphia law firm Berger & Montague, where he co-chairs the firm's antitrust department and leads the firm's employment discrimination practice area. He has published law review articles in the Yale Law Journal, the Duke University journal of Law and Contemporary Problems, the University of San Francisco Law Review and the New York Law School Law Review and worked with the American Law Institute/American Bar Association program on continuing legal education. He has been affiliated with the Kennedy School of Government through the Shorenstein Center of Media and Public Policy at Harvard University. He is currently a partner of the Democracy Alliance and extensively involved in progressive politics in this country on a national, state, and local level. He was a member of the Pennsylvania Humanities Council and is an author and journalist who has published in the Nation magazine and reviewed books for the Philadelphia Inquirer.

Eric L. Cramer graduated summa cum laude from Princeton University (A.B. 1989), where he was selected for Phi Beta Kappa, and cum laude from Harvard Law School (J.D. 1993). He is admitted to practice in Pennsylvania and New York, and various federal courts. Since joining Berger & Montague in 1995, Mr. Cramer has concentrated his practice in complex litigation, representing victims of mass torts and those injured by violations of antitrust and consumer protection laws. Mr. Cramer currently concentrates his practice in the area of complex antitrust litigation -- a field in which Mr. Cramer has been singled out for his accomplishments and acumen. Chambers USA America?s Leading Lawyers for Business (link) has honored Mr. Cramer as one of Pennsylvania's top antitrust lawyers for the years 2005, 2006, and 2007. In 2006, for instance, Chambers USA noted that he is "a young and extremely smart partner" with a "particularly strong grasp of economic analysis." Mr. Cramer has also been repeatedly selected by Philadelphia Magazine (link) as one of the City?s ?Super Lawyers,? and has been chosen as one Lawdragon's "New Stars" in the legal profession (link), where he was referred to as an "antitrust ace." A substantial part of Mr. Cramer's practice over the past decade has involved prosecuting antitrust class actions on behalf of direct purchasers of brand name drugs, charging pharmaceutical manufacturers with illegally blocking the market entry of less expensive competitor drugs. In five such cases, Mr. Cramer was significantly responsible for winning class certification. See In re Cardizem CD Antitrust Litig., 200 F.R.D. 297 (E.D. Mich. 2001); In re Buspirone Patent & Antitrust Litig., 210 F.R.D. 43 (S.D.N.Y. 2002); In re Premarin Antitrust Litig., 225 F.R.D. 208 (S.D. Ohio 2003); and In re Relafen Antitrust Litig., 218 F.R.D. 337 (D. Mass. 2003); In re Ovcon Antitrust Litig., (D.D.C 2007). In the last six years, Mr. Cramer and his colleagues have won substantial settlements in six of these cases for a combined total of more than $700 million: Cardizem settled in November 2002 for $110 million; Buspirone settled in April of 2003 for $220 million; Relafen settled in February 2004 for $175 million; In re Platinol Antitrust Litig. settled in November 2004 for $50 million; In re Terazosin Hydrochloride Antitrust Litig. settled in April 2005 for nearly $75 million; and In re Remeron Antitrust Litig. settled in November 2005 for $75 million. Mr. Cramer is a member of the Advisory Board of the American Antitrust Institute and has presented at several conferences sponsored by that organization. He has also twice co-sponsored, and presented at, symposia at the University of San Francisco School of Law, focusing on antitrust issues in the pharmaceutical industry. Several articles from one of these symposia were published in the Fall 2004 edition of that school?s law review, including a piece co-authored by Mr. Cramer with his partner, Daniel Berger, entitled The Superiority of Direct Proof of Monopoly Power and Anticompetitive Effects in Antitrust Cases Involving Delayed Entry of Generic Drugs, 39 U.S.F. Law Rev. 81 (Fall 2004). Mr. Cramer has also recently appeared on a panel regarding antitrust issues in the pharmaceutical industry at the annual meeting of the ABA, Antitrust Section, and has taught several seminars on the law of class actions and expert witnesses sponsored by the National Business Institute in Philadelphia. Mr. Cramer began his career representing victims of human radiation experimentation carried out by the federal government in conjunction with state and private actors as part of the U.S. atomic weapons program during the Cold War. He helped resolve two such cases for over $4.7 million combined, and was principally responsible for a reversal by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals of a summary judgment dismissal of one of those cases on statute of limitations grounds. See Bibeau, et al. v. Pacific Northwest Research...

John D. Radice concentrates his practice on human rights, civil rights, and antitrust matters at Berger & Montague. Prior to joining the firm in May of 2006, John was associated with a major plaintiffs' class action firm in New York where he primarily represented clients pursuing False Claims Act cases. Mr. Radice clerked for Judge Edith Brown Clement in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans following his graduation from NYU School of Law in 2003. Through the Arthur Garfield Hays Civil Liberties Program at NYU Law, where he was a Palmer Weber Fellow, John pursued internships at the NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund, the ACLU, and a prominent civil rights law firm. He graduated magna cum laude from Princeton University (1997) where he was a member of the lightweight crew team. Mr. Radice is admitted to practice in the state courts in New York and New Jersey, and is a member of the district court bars in the SDNY, EDNY and DNJ. He is not admitted to practice in Pennsylvania.

Matthew McCahill is a 2000 graduate of Rutgers College, where he received a B.A., summa cum laude, in history and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. Mr. McCahill is a 2003 graduate of Fordham Law School, where he was a member of the Fordham Urban Law Journal. Before joining Berger & Montague in January 2006, Mr. McCahill was an associate at Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP in New York, practicing primarily in antitrust litigation. Mr. McCahill continues to focus an antitrust litigation while at Berger & Montague. Mr. McCahill is admitted to practice in the state and federal courts of New York and Pennsylvania, as well as in the U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. He is fluent in French and proficient in Spanish.

Mr Coleman graduated with honors from Williams College in 1970, and from the Yale Law School in 1973, where he received the Benjamin Schapps Award for an outstanding academic achievement. Upon graduation, Mr. Coleman worked for a civil rights law firm in Savannah, Georgia. During his first year of practice Mr. Coleman argued and won the landmark civil rights cases of Westberry v Gilman Paper Co., 507 F.2nd 206 (5th Cir. 1975), which held that the Fourteenth Amendment and 42 USC Section 1985(3) operated in tandem to create a private cause of action, and M.S.K v. State of Georgia, 131 Ga App.1; 205 S.E. 2d 59 (1974) in which the Georgia Court of Appeals held that an order of a juvenile judge that prohibited a 9 year old black child from ever returning to school because he touched a white female class mate in her private parts violated the child's fundamental right to receive an education. He then served as a law clerk for the Honorable Edward T. Gignoux, the United States District Court Judge for the District of Maine. He returned to his native Philadelphia in 1975, where he joined a national firm and gained extensive litigation experience representing Fortune 100 clients in the defense, automotive, high tech, manufacturing and transportation industries, as well as state and municipal governments in a broad range of litigation matters that included commercial, antitrust, condemnation, products liability, construction, and employment cases. Some of the significant reported cases in which Mr Coleman participated during this stage of his career included: In Re Sugar Industry Antitrust Litigation, 73 F.R.D. 322 (E.D. Pa. 1976)(class action issues arising out of sugar antitrust litigation); Rouse Philadelphia, Inc. v Ad Hoc 78 , 274 Pa. Super. 54, 417 A.2d 1248(1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1004(1980)(prepared ACLU Amicus Brief in seeking certiorari from the United States Supreme Court on claim of first amendment protection for consumer boycott); Schuda v Sperry Corporation, 1986 WL 5343 (E.D. Pa. 1986) (won employer jury verdict in age discrimination case). From 1988 through 1994, though his practice remained varied, he headed the management employment practice of his firm's Detroit office. Some of the more significant employment matters Mr. Coleman addressed included: Richards v Southwest Airlines , 966 F.2d 1454(6th Cir, 1992) (affirming summary judgment on wrongful discharge claim); Fix v Unisys Corporation, 782 F. Supp. 343 (E.D. Mich.1992) (winning summary judgment on age and wrongful discharge claims); Jackson ve Sheller-Globe Corp., et. al., Civil Action No. 870-718498CZ, Wayne County Circuit Court (won no cause jury verdict on race, handicap, and wrongful discharge claims); Cochran v. Ernst & Young, Wayne County Retirement Commission and Detroit National Bank, 758 F. Supp. 1548(E.D. Mich.1992) (won summary judgment on behalf of Wayne County Commission in action for violation of pension plan and breach of fiduciary duties). Some of the important lawsuits Mr. Coleman worked on in other areas of the law while in Michigan included: Eldridge v City of Detroit and Southwest Airlines, et. al., Civil Action No. 90-023071-CK, Wayne County Circuit Court ( obtained dismissal of Southwest Airlines from lawsuit involving environmental and land dispute arising out of extension of Detroit City Airport runways for the specific purpose of accommodating greater range of Southwest jets); Fimex v Chysler Corporation, Civil Action N0. 84-CV-7607-AA(E.D. Mich.1984)(defense of Chysler on UCC and common law contract claims arising out of long term supply agreement); Phillips Petroleum Company v. Sun Pipeline Company, et al,. Civil Action No. 87-7253337-CK, Wayne County Circuit Court ( obtained favorable settlement on behalf of Sun Pipeline Company based on counterclaim arising out of Phillips' complaint alleging UCC and common law contract and tort claims predicated on common use of pipeline); City of Detroit v Sisters of Mercy Hospital, Civil...