Fine, Kaplan and Black, R.P.C.

Donald L. Perelman

Donald L. Perelman, a member, is a graduate of the University of Michigan Law School (J.D., magna cum laude, 1980). Mr. Perelman has extensive experience in the conduct of antitrust, class action and other complex litigation, and has been named a Pennsylvania Super Lawyer by Philadelphia Magazine. The U.S. Legal 500 listed Mr. Perelman as one of the nation's "leading lawyers" in the field of antitrust class actions and Benchmark Plaintiffs identified Mr. Perelman as one of its "Local Litigation Stars."

Mr. Perelman is senior member of the co-lead counsel team in the Urethane Antitrust Litigation. As the District Court recognized, "counsel achieved incredible success on the merits of the claims" in this case, including a $1.06 billion judgment against The Dow Chemical Company obtained after a four-week trial, the largest pricing-fixing judgment ever. Ultimately, counsel obtained settlements totaling over $974 million, including an $835 million settlement with Dow. The district court summarized these results as follows: "In almost 25 years of service on the bench, this Court has not experienced a more remarkable result."

Mr. Perelman was senior member of the Fine Kaplan team brought into the Indirect Cathode Ray Tube Antitrust Litigation to serve on lead counsel's Trial Team. The case was settled on the eve of trial for more than $500 million. Mr. Perelman also is on the Executive Committee in the In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation.

Mr. Perelman served as a member of the Plaintiffs' Executive Committee in the In re Linerboard Antitrust Litigation, and was part of the core team that litigated this case until a settlement for more than $200 million was reached in 2003. In the OSB Antitrust Litigation, which settled shortly before trial for more than $125 million, Mr. Perelman served as a member of the Plaintiffs' Executive Committee and played an integral role in the factual and theoretical development of this complex conspiracy case. In the In re Polypropylene Carpet Antitrust Litigation, he was a key member of the team that defeated defendants' summary judgment and Daubert motions. He also served as Co-Discovery Chair in the In re Commercial Explosives Antitrust Litigation, and was principally responsible for the management of the discovery programs in Lawrence v. Phillip Morris and Transamerican Refining v. Dravo.

Mr. Perelman was lead counsel in Cummings v. Stewart Title Guaranty Company, a title insurance overcharge class action, which resulted in the distribution of more than $4 million to thousands of property owners in Pennsylvania. In approving the settlement, the Court stated that "this case struck me as really why we should have class actions." Mr. Perelman was also co-counsel for Respondents in First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan, 514 U.S. 938 (1995). In that case, which was argued by John G. Roberts, Jr., who was then a Partner at Hogan & Hartson and is now Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, Mr. Perelman's clients won a unanimous ruling by the United States Supreme Court.

Mr. Perelman is also a long-standing member of the Executive Committee of the PMFMNB, which will soon be entering its 13th (and hopefully not last) year in operation. See Monday night lights. He is a past recipient of the distinguished Commissioner's Award and a three-time Defensive Player of the Year.

Practice Areas

  • Class Actions
  • Antitrust

Bar Admissions

  • Illinois, 1980
  • Pennsylvania, 1983

Education

  • The University of Michigan Law School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1980, J.D.
    Honors: magna cum laude
  • Dickinson College, Carlisle, PA, 1976, B.A.
    Honors: magna cum laude

Representative Cases

  • In re Urethane Antitrust Litig., 768 F.3d 1245 (10th Cir. 2014)
  • In re OSB Antitrust Litig., 2007 WL 2253418 (E.D. Pa. 2007)
  • Cummings v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co., No. 00747 (Phila. Com. Pl. 2005)
  • In re Linerboard Antitrust Litig., 305 F.3d 145 (3rd Cir. 2002)
  • In re Polypropylene Carpet Antitrust Litig., 93 F. Supp. 2d 1348 (N.D. GA 2000)
  • In re Commercial Explosives Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1093 (D. Utah 1996)
  • Lawrence v. Phillip Morris, CIV 94-1494 (E.D.N.Y. 1997)
  • Transamerican Refining v. Dravo Corp, CIV H-88-781 (S.D.N.Y. 1990)