Vincent J. Esades

B.A. cum laude, U. of N. Dakota
J.D., U. of N. Dakota School of Law

Admitted: Minnesota and North Dakota; U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota

Email     vCard

Vincent Esades is an equity member of the firm. He has a national practice in the field of complex litigation, primarily in the areas of antitrust, consumer fraud and securities fraud. Mr. Esades has consistently been recognized as an outstanding attorney in the practice of antitrust, consumer law, class action and mass torts litigation on the annual Thomson Reuters Super Lawyers list, most recently in the 2014 edition. He has also been recognized as a top antitrust litigator by The Legal 500 US,which ranks Heins Mills & Olson as one of the top five antitrust class actions firms nationally. The 2012 inaugural edition of Benchmark Plaintiff: The Definitive Guide to America’s Leading Plaintiff Firms & Attorneys recognized Vincent Esades as one of the Minnesota “Litigation Stars” in the practice of antitrust, consumer and complex litigation.

Vince has worked on numerous major antitrust cases, as lead counsel and in other capacities. He currently serves as lead counsel for the consumer class in a class action on behalf of Target customers arising from one of the largest data security breaches in history. (In re Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, MDL No. 2522 (D. Minn.). On December 18, 2014, the court denied for the most part Target’s motion to dismiss, which had presented a particularly daunting challenge in the wake of decisions by other courts to dismiss similar claims for compensation for theft of personal data from other U.S. retailers. To distinguish Target from other cases, where customers claimed only the potential for future injury, the Target complaint carefully detailed actual injury to the class representatives in the form of unauthorized charges on their cards, lost access to their accounts, and payment of late fees, card-replacement fees, credit monitoring costs and other financial harm, as well as harm flowing from additional future abuse of their sensitive information arising from sale of consumers’ data on the Internet black market.

Vince has also served in a leadership role in a number of other major antitrust cases, including appointment as co-lead counsel in In re Lipitor Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 2332 (D.N.J.), which involves antitrust and consumer protection claims on behalf of proposed class of indirect purchasers of the prescription drug;Fond Du Lac Bumper Exchange, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Jui Li Enterprise Company, Ltd., et al., Case No. 09c0852 (E.D. Wis.) which involves claims of nationwide price fixing of automotive sheet metal parts by after market sheet metal parts manufacturers; and In re Puerto Rican Cabotage Antitrust Litigation (MDL No. 1960 D.P.R) which involves price fixing by Jones Act shipping companies for ocean shipping services between the U.S. and Puerto Rico. Vince was also appointed by the court as a member of the plaintiffs’ steering committee in In re Pool Products Distribution Market Antitrust Litigation (MDL No. 2328, E.D. La.) (asserting claims of monopolization and attempted monopolization of the U.S. pool products distribution market) and in In re Aluminum Warehousing Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 2481 (S.D.N.Y.) (claims alleging conspiracy to inflate aluminum prices, restrain aluminum supplies and provide extremely inefficient, low quality load out and other services).. He has served as plaintiffs’ lead or co-lead counsel in several other nationwide class actions, including In re Publication Paper Antitrust Litigation (MDL No. 1631 D. Conn.) (price-fixing claims against paper manufacturers); Johnson v. ELCA Board of Pensions (representing retired pastors and church employees with breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty claims against the ELCA Board of Pensions); In re Polyester Staple Antitrust Litigation (MDL No. 1516 W.D.N.C.) (price fixing claims against polyester staple manufacturers on behalf of business purchasers where Vince also served as member of the trial team before the case settled on the eve of trial); and In Re Bulk Graphite Antitrust Litigation (D.N.J.) (price fixing claims against manufacturers of bulk graphite on behalf of business purchasers).

Vince is also currently involved as a member of plaintiffs’ executive committees in numerous other nationwide class actions including In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal.) (price-fixing claims against producers of Thin Film Transistor Liquid Crystal Displays); In re Municipal Derivatives Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.) (claims on behalf of local governments against brokers, banks and insurance companies alleging bid-rigging and other anti-competitive practices in the municipal derivatives industry); In re Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation (D.D.C. ) (claims alleging conspiracy among major domestic railroads to fix prices for rail freight surcharges); In re Intel Corp. Microprocessor Antitrust Litigation (D. Del) (claims alleging monopolistic practices by Intel in the x86 microprocessor market).   He is also participating in In re: LIBOR-Based Financial Instruments Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.) (claims alleging that member banks of the British Bankers’ Association conspired to manipulate the London InterBank Offered Rate) and In re Air Cargo Shipping Services Antitrust Litigation (E.D.N.Y) (claims against major airlines alleging price-fixing of fuel surcharges for freight transportation).

Vince tried a price-fixing case to verdict as a member of multi-firm trial team in the In re High Pressure Laminates Antitrust Litigation (MDL No. 1368 S.D.N.Y.) (price-fixing claims against manufacturers of high pressure laminates on behalf of business purchasers) and served as lead counsel in a case tried by Heins Mills and other co-lead counsel in November 2008, the In re Universal Service Fund Telephone Billing Practices Litigation. (MDL No. 1468 D. Kan.) (consumer fraud and price-fixing claims against AT&T, MCI and Sprint for USF surcharges). As lead counsel, Vince represented classes of consumers and obtained nationwide settlements in In re Lawnmower Engines Horsepower Marketing & Sales Practices Litigation (MDL No. 1999 E.D. Wisc.) (alleging RICO, consumer fraud, civil conspiracy and unjust enrichment claims against manufacturers of lawn mowers and lawn mower engines).

Vince has actively participated in numerous other complex class actions as well, including In re Hydrogen Peroxide Antitrust Litigation (E.D. Pa.) (price-fixing claims against manufacturers of hydrogen peroxide); In re Vitamins Antitrust Litigation (D.D.C.) (discovery co-chair); Howe v. Microsoft Corp. (N.D.) (lead counsel); Gordon v. Microsoft Corp. (Minn., 4th Jud. Dist.); In re NASDAQ Market-Makers Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.); and In re Motorsports Merchandise Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Ga.).

Vince has presented at the ABA Annual Convention and the ABA Annual National Institute on Class Actions as a moderator and panelist regarding major antitrust issues, including the Class Action Fairness Act, multi-state settlement issues and class arbitration.

  • Institute Planning Committee and Moderator, ABA’s 17th Annual National Institute on Class Actions, ““Arbigeddon!!!” Has the Revolution to End Class Actions Spawned Weapons of Mass Arbitration?”, Boston, MA, October 23-24, 2013, sponsored by the ABA’s Litigation Section’s Class Action and Derivative Suits Committee
  • Institute Planning Committee and Moderator, ABA’s 16th Annual National Institute on Class Actions, “Sifting Through All the Big Shoulders.” Litigating Class Actions Alongside Opt-Outs – Free-Riding or Riding Shotgun”, Chicago, IL, October 24-25, 2012, sponsored by the ABA’s Litigation Section’s Class Action and Derivative Suits Committee
  • Institute Planning Committee and Moderator, ABA’s 15th Annual National Institute on Class Actions, “Melee in Manhattan! Class-Action Objectors — Are They Protectors of Absent Class Members or Merely Gadflies?”, New York City, NY, October 14, 2011, sponsored by the ABA’s Litigation Section’s Class Action and Derivative Suits Committee
  • Institute Planning Committee and Moderator, ABA’s 14th Annual National Institute on Class Actions, “Perspectives on Multidistrict Litigation from the MDL Panel and Beyond”, Chicago, IL, October 14, 2010, sponsored by the ABA’s Litigation Section’s Class Action and Derivative Suits Committee
  • Panelist and Moderator, ABA’s 13th Annual National Institute on Class Actions, “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Courthouse . . . I Had to Litigate an Arbitration Clause! Crafting, Opposing, and Arguing Arbitration Clauses and Class-Action Waivers in Three Scenes,” Washington DC, November 20, 2009, sponsored by the ABA’s Litigation Section’s Class Action and Derivative Suits Committee
  • Panelist, American Antitrust Institute’s Annual Invitational Symposium on The Future of Private Antitrust Enforcement, “Action on the Class Action Front: A Potpourri” Washington, DC, December 11, 2008.
  • Panelist, ABA’s 12th Annual National Institute on Class Actions, “‘I Could Have Sworn It was CAFA, not Kafka!’ The Metamorphosis of Pleading, Defending, and Settling Multi-State Class Actions—A Surreal-Life, Three-Act Play,” New York, NY, November 7, 2008, sponsored by the ABA’s Litigation Section’s Class Action and Derivative Suits Committee
  • Lecturer, “Class Actions: Growing Your Business by Understanding the Basics and Recognizing Opportunities,” Cleveland, OH, October 31, 2008, sponsored by the Cleveland Bar Association
  • Panelist, ABA’s 11th Annual National Institute on Class Actions, “The Nationwide Class: White Elephant, Endangered Species, or Alive and Well?” Chicago, IL, October 19, 2007, sponsored by the ABA’s Litigation Section’s Class Action and Derivative Suits Committee
  • Panelist, ABA’s 2007 Annual Meeting, “‘Is this CAFA or Kafka?’  Multi-State Class Actions in a Time of Metamorphosis–A Surreal-Life, Three-Act Play,” San Francisco, CA, August 9-12, 2007, sponsored by the ABA