David F. Sorensen
David Sorensen is an Executive Shareholder and Co-Chair of the Firm’s antitrust department. He graduated from Duke University (A.B. 1983) and Yale Law School (J.D. 1989), and clerked for the Hon. Norma L. Shapiro (E.D. Pa.). He concentrates his practice on antitrust and environmental class actions.
Mr. Sorensen co-tried Cook v. Rockwell Int’l Corp., No. 90-181 (D. Colo.) and received, along with the entire trial team, the “Trial Lawyer of the Year” award in 2009 from the Public Justice Foundation for their work on the case, which resulted in a jury verdict of $554 million in February 2006, after a four-month trial, on behalf of thousands of property owners near the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant located outside Denver, Colorado. The jury verdict was then the largest in Colorado history, and was the first time a jury has awarded damages to property owners living near one of the nation’s nuclear weapons sites. In 2008, after extensive post-trial motions, the District Court entered a $926 million judgment for the plaintiffs. The jury verdict in the case was vacated on appeal in 2010. In 2015, on a second trip to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, Plaintiffs secured a victory with the case being sent back to the district court. In 2016, the parties reached a $375 million settlement, which received final approval in 2017.
Mr. Sorensen played a major role in the Firm’s representation of the State of Connecticut in State of Connecticut v. Philip Morris, Inc., et al., in which Connecticut recovered approximately $3.6 billion (excluding interest) from certain manufacturers of tobacco products. And he served as co-lead class counsel in Johnson v. AzHHA, et al., No. 07-1292 (D. Ariz.), representing a class of temporary nursing personnel who had been underpaid because of an alleged conspiracy among Arizona hospitals. The case settled for $24 million.
Mr. Sorensen also has played a leading role in numerous antitrust cases representing direct purchasers of prescription drugs. Many of these cases have alleged that pharmaceutical manufacturers have wrongfully kept less expensive generic drugs off the market, in violation of the antitrust laws. Many of these cases have resulted in substantial cash settlements, including In re: Namenda Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litigation, (S.D.N.Y.) ($750 million settlement – largest single-defendant settlement ever for a case alleging delayed generic competition); King Drug Co. v. Cephalon, Inc., (E.D. Pa.) ($512 million partial settlement); In re: Aggrenox Antitrust Litigation ($146 million settlement); In re Loestrin 24 Fe Antitrust Litigation ($120 million); In re: K-Dur Antitrust Litigation ($60.2 million); In re: Prandin Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litigation ($19 million); In re: Doryx Antitrust Litigation ($15 million); In re: Skelaxin Antitrust Litigation ($73 million); In re: Wellbutrin XL Antitrust Litigation ($37.50 million); In re: Oxycontin Antitrust Litigation ($16 million); In re: DDAVP Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litigation ($20.25 million settlement following precedent-setting victory in the Second Circuit, which Mr. Sorensen argued, see 585 F.3d 677 (2d Cir. 2009)); In re: Nifedipine Antitrust Litigation ($35 million); In re: Terazosin Hydrochloride Antitrust Litigation, MDL 1317 (S.D. Fla.) ($74.5 million); and In re: Remeron Antitrust Litigation ($75 million). Mr. Sorensen is serving as co-lead counsel or on the executive committee of numerous similar, pending cases.
In 2017, the American Antitrust Institute presented its Antitrust Enforcement Award to Mr. Sorensen and others for their work on the K-Dur case. In 2019, Mr. Sorensen and others were recognized again by the AAI for their work on the King Drug case, being awarded the Outstanding Antitrust Litigation Achievement in Private Law Practice. Mr. Sorensen and his team received the same award in 2020 for their work on the Namenda case. Also in 2020, Law360 named Mr. Sorensen a Competition MVP of the Year.
- Has presented at a number of symposia relating to antitrust issues in the pharmaceutical industry, including conferences in 2015 and 2014 in Philadelphia sponsored by HarrisMartin concerning “Pay for Delay” agreements.
From Judge William E. Smith, of the U.S. District Court of the District of Rhode Island:
The degree to which you all litigated the case is — you know, I can’t imagine attorneys litigating a case more rigorously than you all did in this case. It seems like every conceivable, legitimate, substantive dispute that could have been fought over was fought over to the max. So you, both sides, I think litigated the case as vigorously as any group of attorneys could. The level of representation of all parties in terms of the sophistication of counsel was, in my view, of the highest levels. I can’t imagine a case in which there was really a higher quality of representation across the board than this one.
Transcript of the August 27, 2020 Hearing in In re Loestrin 24 Fe Antitrust Litigation, No. 13-md-02472 (D.R.I.)
Prominent Judgments and Settlements
- State of Connecticut v. Philip Morris, Inc., et al.
- Johnson v. Arizona Hosp. and Healthcare Assoc. (settled for $22.4 million in 2010).
In the News
- Berger Montague’s Antitrust Practice Group Ranked in Chambers USA 2021
- Berger Montague’s Namenda Case Team Honored at the American Antitrust Institute’s 2020 Antitrust Enforcement Awards
- David F. Sorensen Named a 2020 Competition MVP by Law360
- Berger Montague’s Antitrust Practice Group, Department Co-Chairs Ranked in Chambers USA 2020
- Two Berger Montague Attorneys Honored at the American Antitrust Institute’s 2019 Antitrust Enforcement Awards
- Berger Montague’s Antitrust Practice Group, Department Co-Chairs Ranked in Chambers USA 2019
- In re Namenda Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litigation – Class Notice
- Berger Montague's Antitrust Practice Group, Notable Practitioners Ranked in the Chambers USA 2018 Guide